Full text of "The Lambeth conferences of 1867, 1878, and 1888 : with the official reports and resolutions, together with the sermons preached at the conferences"

See other formats

THE
LAMBETH CONFERENCES
oF 1867, 1878, AND 1888.

a re
LEEDS CHURCH INSTITUTE.

| TIME ALLOWED FOR READING, 14 DAYS.
XW

-ἃ Ξ -

If, after the expiration of 14 days, the
work is demanded by the Librarian and
NOT RETURNED, a fine of Id. Per Day

will be incurred.—(Rule 26).

THE VERY REV.
THE DEAN OF WINDSOR.

For REFERENCE ΟΝ.

NOT TO BE TAKEN AWAY.

7] 4 “2 a 4
No. A ps "πῆρ τὼ 2 g ἤ ;
VY ΟΣ ΑΜ, oO vr *

ἂν
πε τὺ,

we tae

ΑΖ:
ae ates
ΚΑῚ

Ghe Liambeth Clonferences.

The Lambeth Conferences

1867, 1878, and 1888.

With the Official Reports and Resolutions, together

with the Sermons preached at the Conferences.

EDITED BY

RANDALL T. DAVIDSON,

DEAN OF WINDSOR,

LONDON :
SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE,
NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, CHARING CROSS, W.C. ;
43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.C.
BRIGHTON : 135, Nortu STREET.

New York: E. ἃ J. B. YOUNG ἃ Co.
1889.

CONTENTS.

----ο«---
PAM. <1.
NARRATIVE.
Page
CuHapP. I.—The First Conference, ΤῸ). ace dis ee 9
Cuap. II.—The Second Conference, 1878 Ee
Cuap. I1I.—The Third Conference, 1888. ids ere
PARA. LI.

DOCUMENTS, REPORTS, AND RESOLUTIONS, ILLUSTRATING
THE HISTORY OF THE CONFERENCES.
Page
I.—Letters from the Canadian Bishops: Reply of
the Archbishop of Canterbury Re ee ies ee δἢ
II.—Action taken by the Convocation of Canterbury 55

III.—Official “ Programme of Arrangements” issued
by the Archbishop of Canterbury for the

Conference of 1867 ... | ... se ἜΡΗΜΟΣ; ὦ
IV.—Sermon by the Bishop of Illinois, Sept. 24,
ty τ νέν ἐπ oe ten aut Stir is OF
V.—Archbishop Longley’s Opening Address, Sept. 24,
1867 φὴς per “ΝΗ wie a ne. 77
VI.—Amended Programme adopted during the Ses-
sions i ies pis ὮΝ baa τ Ὁ 39

VII.—Formal “Address to the Faithful” from the
Bishops attending the Conference of 1867 ... 88

VIII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Address ... 92

6 Lambeth Conferences.

Page
IX.—Resolutions formally passed by the Conference
of 1867 ... Sip τὰν er wad iene
X.—Correspondence with Dean Stanley about the
use of Westminster Abbey, 1867 ___... sae 808

XI.—Sermon by the Bishop of Montreal, Sept. 28,
1867 τ Sp a ae τὰς op τ

XII.—Reports of the Committees appointed by the

Conference of 1867... abe: ΕΣ kite ae
(A) Synodical System ... bits ows: RID
(B) Voluntary Spiritual Tribunals ik Ὁ ρα τό κι ἐν,
(c) Courts οὗ Metropolitans ... ἘΞ |
(D) Election of Bishops vr Pe ες i
(E) Declaration of submission to Svan i ae
(F) Provincial Subordination ... Sie Σὰν 3.28
(6) Missionary Bishoprics ns τὴ “ὦ
(H) Condition of the Church in N atal os δ γι
(J) Letters Dimissory ... nat a ine; 90 ©

XIII.—Resolutions of the Conference ase at the
Adjourned Session, Dec. 10, 1867... ai 290

XIV.—Addresses from the Canadian and West Indian
Houses of Bishops, 1872 and 1873 .... PEED Φ9

XV.—Correspondence between the Bishops of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in the United
States and the Archbishop of Canterbury,
1874 and 1875 ... a haa ne eae F |

XVI.—Memorandum of the Canadian House of
Bishops, 1874... ae ἘΡΕ Re feet She

XVII.—Action of the Convocations of Canterbury and
York with reference to the pests Second
Conference ies ae iv . - 149

XVIII.—Circular Letter of Inquiry addressed by the
Archbishop of Canterbury to all the Anglican
Bishops, March 28, 1876 a pa ὑπο τ

Contents. 7
Page

XIX.—Letter of Invitation to the Conference of 1878,
dated July 10,1877... “at Aa i eS

XX.—Sermon by the Archbishop of York, on July
ye rg: ὡς aA χε πῶ ον Peete i

XXI.—Official “Letter” of the Bishops attending
the Conference of 1878, including the
Reports ... me bia ΡῈ diss ie TOR
(1) Best mode of maintaining union ιν, 164
(2) Voluntary Boards of Arbitration ... PAS Ip i
(3) Missionary Bishops and Missionaries ... 174
(4) Anglican Chaplains on the Continent ... 179
(5) Answers to questions submitted during
_ the Conference ... τὰ oa εἰς 188

XXII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Letter ... 191

XXIII.—Official List of the Bishops present at the
; Conference of 1878 ... a ae ica’ 208

XXIV.—Order of precedence observed at the Con-
ference of 1878... ἂν ed ἘΡ vce 206

XXV.—Sermon by the Bishop of Pennsylvania, July
27, 1898s bei Sa ike me 40 208

XXVI.—Prayer issued for use before and during the
Conference ti ai EP * ee 222

XXVII.—Papers issued to the Bishops in connection

with the Conference of 1888 ... ee Pe σὴ
XXVIII.—Sermon by the Archbishop of Canterbury,
on July, 2, 1888... es a dea ven 329

XXIX.—Sermon by the Bishop of Minnesota, on July,
P1888: i. ὙΠ bia des See seg 2G

XXX.—Address to the Queen, July 27, 1888, and Her
Majesty’s Reply... ete δὸς ies sen, 252

8 Lambeth Conferences.

XXXI.—Official List of the Bishops present at the
Conference of 1888 rem it

XXXII.—Official List of the Bishops present at the
Conference, arranged according to Provinces

XXXIII.—Encyclical Letter from the Assembled
Bishops, issued July 27, 1888... cs

XXXIV.—Resolutions formally adopted by the Con-
ference of 1888 ois Sree bit ΝΑ ΥᾺ ean

XXXV.—Reports of Committees :—
(1) Intemperance
(2) Purity...
(3) Divorce
(4). Polygamy
(5) Observance of Sunday
(6) Socialism ἀξ.
(7) Care of Emigrants ...
(8) Mutual Relations of Dioceses and
Branches of the Anglican Communion...
(9) Home Reunion a
(10) Scandinavian Church, Old Catholics, &c...
(11) Eastern Churches

(12) Authoritative Standards of Doctrine and
Worship

XXXVI.—Statement in regard to Ordinations per-
formed by Dr. Cummins, &c.

XXXVII.—Sermon by the Archbishop of York, July
28, 1888 | ‘ yen ὌΝ ae

XXXVIII.—Latin and Greek Versions of the Encyclical
Letter and Resolutions of 1888

Page

256

260

264

277

285
292
296
298
301
303
311

321
331
339
347

352

359

364

376

NA Reve DIE.

CHAPTER I.

THE FIRST CONFERENCE, 1867.

ERHAPS it is not too much to say that a
decennial Conference of the bishops of the
Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the
Archbishop of Canterbury, has now become a recog-
nised part of the organisation of our Church, and
the general attention which has been directed to
the third of these Conferences seems to afford a
suitable opportunity for recalling the history and
doings of the earlier gatherings of 1867 and 1878.

The first official step in connexion with the assem-
bling of such a Conference was taken, not 1n England,
but in Canada. The notion had, indeed, been “in
the air” for many years,! both in England and abroad,
and the final impulse which brought about a Con-
ference was eminently significant of the changed
conditions of the Church.

It arose, strange to say, from the interest awakened
in North America by the Church affairs of South
Africa.

At the Provincial Synod of the Canadian Church,
held on September 20, 1865, it was unanimously
agreed, upon the motion of the Bishop of Ontario, to
urge upon the Archbishop of Canterbury and the
Convocation of his Province that means should be
adopted “by which the members of our Anglican

‘ A reference to some of the earlier suggestions on the
subject will be found in the Guardian of June 19, 1878, p. 857.
B ee
-

ΙΟ Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Communion in all quarters of the world should have
a share in the deliberations for her welfare, and be
permitted to have a representation in one General
Council of her members gathered from every land.” ἢ

To a more personal appeal which accompanied this
address, Archbishop Longley replied in guarded
terms. “ The meeting of such a Synod,” he said, “ is
not by any means foreign to my own feelings... .
I cannot, however, take any step in so grave a matter
without consulting my episcopal brethren in both
branches of the united Church of England and
Ireland, as well as those in the different colonies and
dependencies of the British Empire.”

In May, 1866, the Convocation of Canterbury
appointed a committee to “consider and report
upon” the Canadian address, and the whole subject
was fully debated in Convocation in the following
spring. Obvious difficulties and dangers were
suggested, but in the end the Lower House con-
veyed to the Archbishop of Canterbury “ἃ re-
spectful expression of an earnest desire that he
would be pleased to issue an invitation to all the
bishops in communion with the Church of England,
to assemble at such time and place, and accom-
panied by such persons as may be deemed fit, for the
purpose of Christian sympathy and mutual counsel
on matters affecting the welfare of the Church at
home and abroad.’”?

In the Upper House, Archbishop Longley took
the utmost pains to “diminish the doubts and diffi-
culties” of some of his brethren. “It should be
distinctly understood,” he said, “that at this meeting
no declaration of faith shall be made, and no decision
come to which shall affect generally the interests of

1 For the full text of the address and reply, see Part II., No. I.,
p. 51, and Chronicle of Convocation of Canterbury, May 2,
1866, p. 286 ; Feb. 12, 1867, p. 696.

* Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 14, 1867, p. 793.

Invitation to the First Conference. II

the Church, but that we shall meet together for
brotherly counsel and encouragement ....I should
refuse to convene any assembly which pretended to
enact any canons, or affected to make any decisions
binding on the Church... . 1 feel I undertake a
great responsibility in assenting to this request, and
certainly if I saw anything approaching to what [15
apprehended] as likely to result from it, I should
not be disposed to sanction it, but I can assure [my
brethren] that I should enter on this meeting in the
full confidence that nothing would pass but that
which tended to brotherly love and union, and would
bind the Colonial Church, which is certainly ina
most unsatisfactory state, more aaa to the Mother
Church.” }

A week later the Archbishop issued ‘the following
invitation to all the bishops of the Anglican Com-
munion, then 144 in number :—

** LAMBETH PALACE, Fed. 22, 1867.
RIGHT REV. AND DEAR BROTHER,—

“1 request your presence at a meeting of the
bishops in visible communion with the United Church
of England and Ireland, purposed (God willing) to
be holden at Lambeth, under my presidency, on the
24th of September next and the three following days
_ “The circumstances under which I have resolved
to issue the present invitation are these :—The
Metropolitan and Bishops of Canada, last year,
addressed to the two Houses of the Convocation of
Canterbury the expression of their desire that I
should be moved to invite the bishops of our Indian
and Colonial Episcopate to meet myself and the
Home bishops for brotherly communion and con-
ference.

“The consequence of that appeal has been that

' Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 15, 1867, p. 807.
B2

12 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

both Houses of the Convocation of my province have
addressed to me their dutiful request that I would
invite the attendance, not only of our Home and
Colonial bishops, but of all who are avowedly in
communion with our Church. The same request
was unanimously preferred to me at a numerous
gathering of English, Irish,and Colonial archbishops
and bishops recently assembled at Lambeth; at
which,—I rejoice to record it,—we had the counsel and
concurrence of an eminent bishop of the Church in
the United States of America,—the Bishop of Illinois.

“Moved by these requests, and by the expressed
concurrence therein of other members both of the
Home and Colonial episcopate, who could not be
present at our meeting, I have now resolved,—not,
I humbly trust, without the guidance of God the
Holy Ghost,—to grant this grave request, and call
together the meeting thus earnestly desired. I greatly
hope that you may be able to attend it, and to aid
us with your presence and brotherly counsel thereat.

“T propose that, at our assembling, we should first
solemnly seek the blessing of Almighty God on our
gathering, by uniting together in the highest act of
the Church’s worship. After this, brotherly consul-
tations will follow. In these we may consider to-
gether many practical questions, the settlement of
which would tend to the advancement of the kingdom
of our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, and to the
maintenance of greater union in our missionary work,
and to increased intercommunion among ourselves.

“Such a meeting would not be competent to make
declarations or lay down definitions on points of
doctrine. But united worship and common counsels
would greatly tend to maintain practically the unity
of the faith ; whilst they would bind us in straiter
bonds of peace and brotherly charity.

“T shall gladly receive from you a list of any sub-
jects you may wish to suggest to me for consideration
and discussion. Should you be unable to attend,
and desire to commission any brother bishop to

Difficulties of an Agenda-paper. 13

speak for you, I shall welcome him as your repre-
sentative in our united deliberations.

“But I must once more express my earnest hope
that, on this solemn occasion, I may have the great
advantage of your personal presence.

“ And now I commend this proposed meeting to
your fervént prayers; and, humbly beseeching the
blessing of Almighty God on yourself and your
diocese, I subscribe myself,

“ Your faithful brother in the Lord,
“Ὁ, T. CANTUAR.”

‘The invitation was accepted by seventy-six
bishops, and as soon as those who came from the
Colonies and the United States began to arrive in
England, a series of preliminary meetings was held
to discuss and arrange the details of a Conference for
which no precedent existed to serve as a guide. The
strong divergence of opinion upon the legal aspect
of Bishop Colenso’s deposition and excommunication,
and the fact that the Bishop of Capetown had come to
England on purpose to secure, if possible, the synodical
sanction of the Conference to the course he had him-
self adopted, made the agenda-paper a matter of no
small difficulty, if it was to be kept within the limits
laid down by the Archbishop of Canterbury in the
Convocation speech which has been quoted above.
Not a few of the English bishops felt so sure of the
increased confusion such a Conference must cause in
an already tangled web that they declined to attend
its deliberations. Among these were the Archbishop
of York and the Bishops of Durham, Carlisle, Ripon,
Peterborough, and Manchester. Others, including
Bishop Thirlwall, of St. David’s, postponed their
acceptance until the official agenda-paper or pro-
gramme should be published, a fact to which they
afterwards called attention when the programme had
unexpectedly been changed.

The Conference met on Tuesday, September 24,

1 For its full text, see Part II., No. 111.) p. 56.

14 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

the opening service being preceded by a Celebration
of Holy Communion in Lambeth Palace Chapel,
with a sermon from Bishop Whitehouse, of Il|linois.!
The meetings of the Conference were held in the
upstairs dining-hall, or “guard-room,” of Lambeth
Palace, not (as was the case in 1878) in the great
library. On the Archbishop of Canterbury’s right
sat the Archbishop of Armagh, the Bishop of London,
the Presiding Bishop of the American Church, the
Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, the Bishop
of Calcutta, and the Bishop of Sydney. On the left
were the Archbishop of Dublin, and the Bishops of
Montreal, New Zealand, and Capetown. The other
bishops sat in front. The Bishop of Gloucester and
Bristol acted as episcopal secretary to the meeting
throughout its deliberations.

In his opening address,” Archbishop Longley again
defined, with some care, the position of the Con-
ference. “It has never been contemplated,” he said,
“that we should assume the functions of a general
synod of all the churches in full communion with
the Church of England, and take upon ourselves to
enact canons that should be binding upon those
here represented. We merely propose to discuss
matters of practical interest, and pronounce what
we deem expedient in resolutions which may serve
as safe guides to future action. Thus it will be seen
that our first essay is rather tentative and experi-
mental, in a matter in which we have no distinct
precedent to direct us.”

Special importance attached to the discussions of
the first day, when, in the form of a preamble to the
subsequent resolutions, the standpoint taken by the
Anglican Church was in general terms described.
All the leading bishops took part in the debate, and
its outcome will be best seen by placing the para-
graph, as it was first drafted, side by side with the
form which was finaily agreed upon.

1 See Part II., No. IV., p. 61. 3 See Part II., No. V., p. 77-

The Alternative Preamble.

As originally drafted.

“We, Bishops of Christ’s
Holy Catholic Church, profes-
sing the faith of the primitive
and undivided Church, as based
on Scripture, defined by the
first four General Councils,!
and reaffirmed by the Fathers
of the English Reformation,
now assembled by the good
providence of God at the Archi-
episcopal Palace of Lambeth,
under the presidency of the
Primate of all England, desire,
first, to give hearty thanks to
Almighty God for having thus
brought us togetherfor common
counsels and united worship ;
secondly, we desire to express
the deep sorrow with which we
view the divided condition of
the flock of Christ throughout
the world ; and, lastly, we do
here solemnly declare our belief
that the best hope of future re-
union will be found in drawing
each of us for ourselves closer
to our common Lord, in giving
ourselves to much prayer and
intercession, in the cultivation
of a spirit of charity, and in
seeking to diffuse throughevery
part of the Christian com-
munity that desire and reso-
lution to return to the faith and
discipline of the undivided
Church which was the principle
of the English Reformation.”

1 See 1 Eliz. c. i. xxxvi.

As ultimately carried.

“We, Bishops of Christ’s
Holy Catholic Church, in visible
Communion with the United
Church of Englandand Ireland,
professing the faith delivered
to us in Holy Scripture, main-
tained by the primitive Church
and by the Fathers of the
English Reformation, now as-
sembled bythe good providence
of God, at the Archiepiscopal
Palace of Lambeth, under the
presidency of the Primate of
all England, desire, first, to
give hearty thanks to Almighty
God for having thus brought us
together for common counsels
and united worship ; secondly,
we desire to express the deep
sorrow with which we view the
divided condition of the flock
of Christ throughout the world,
ardently longing for the fulfil-
ment of the prayer of our Lord:
‘That all may be one, as Thou,
Father, art in me, and 1 in
Thee, that they also may be
one in us, that the world may
believe that Thou has sent
me’; and, lastly, we do here
solemnly record our conviction
that unity will be most effec-
tually promoted, by maintain-
ing the faith in its purity and
integrity, as taught in the Holy
Scriptures, held by the primi-
tive Church, summed up in the
Creeds, and affirmed by the
undisputed General Councils,
and by drawing each of us
closer to our common Lord,
by giving ourselves to much
prayer and intercession, by the
cultivation ofa spirit ef charity,
and a love of the Lord’s appear-
ing.”

16 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

On the second day—Wednesday, September 25
—the president consented, notwithstanding the
strenuous protest of several bishops, to a complete
change of programme, in accordance with the wish
of the Bishop of Capetown and others, and the
discussions were thus diverted into an unexpected
channel. A long day was occupied in discussing
the due gradation of synodal authority, diocesan,
provincial, and perhaps patriarchal, within the
Anglican Communion. After the failure of succes-
sive attempts to obtain the formal sanction of the Con-
ference to the definite schemes proposed, it was found
necessary to fall back upon a perfectly general reso-
lution proposed by Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand,
in the following terms :—“ That, in the opinion of
this Conference, unity of faith and discipline will be
best maintained among the several branches of the
Anglican Communion by due and canonical subor-
dination of the synods of the several branches to
the higher authority of a synod or synods above
them.” :

This was carried ze. con.,and a committee was
appointed to consider the whole subject.

On the following day (Thursday, Sept. 26), the
“burning question ” of Bishop Colenso’s position was
the subject of prolonged debate. The Archbishop
of Canterbury had declined to allow any distinct
resolution of condemnation to be put to the Confer-
ence, and he ruled out of order a motion to that
effect which was proposed by the Presiding Bishop
of the American Church. After several hours dis-
cussion, it was resolved, by 49 votes to Io, “that, in
the judgment of the bishops here assembled, the
whole Anglican Communion is deeply injured by
the present condition of the Church in Natal ; and
that a committee be now appointed at this general
meeting to report on the best mode by which the

1 See Part II., No. VI., p. 33.

Encyclical Address to the Faithful. 17

Church may be delivered from the continuance of
this scandal, and the truth maintained. That such
report be forwarded to his Grace the Lord Arch-
bishop of Canterbury with the request that his Grace
will be pleased to transmit the same to all the
_ bishops of the Anglican Communion, and to ask for
their judgment thereon.”

The next matter dealt with was the possible con-
stitution of what was described as a Spiritual Court
of Appeal ; and on this subject it was found neces-
sary, after long debate, to await the report of a
committee before any formal recommendation could
be made. Such a committee was accordingly ap-
pointed “to consider the constitution of a voluntary
spiritual tribunal, to which questions of doctrine may
be carried by appeal from the tribunals for the exercise
of discipline in each Province of the Colonial
Church.”

It had, upon the previous day, been informally
decided that a short “ Encyclical” Letter or Address
should be drafted by a Committee! for the signa-
ture of the Bishops attending the Conference. ‘This
Address was adopted by the whole body before the
adjournment on Thursday evening, and was formally
signed at the morning session on the following day.’
It was suggested in the Conference that it should be
publicly read by the Archbishop from the altar of
Lambeth Parish Church; but this course was not
adopted. After other resolutions? had been carried
with respect to the due notification of the establish-
ment of new dioceses, the provision of Letters Com-
mendatory, and the proper measure of publicity to

1 The Committee consisted of the Archbishop of Canterbury
and the Bishops of London, Winchester, Oxford, North
Carolia, Grahamstown, Ohio, Ely, St. Andrews, Cape Town,
Moray and Ross, and New Zealand.

* The complete document, as signed, is given below.
Part II., No. VIL, p. 88.

* See Part II., No. ΙΧ. p. 98.

18 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

be given to the proceedings of the Conference,
a second and unexpected debate arose upon the
position of Bishop Colenso, and a resolution was
carried expressing the acquiescence of the Confe-
rence in certain advice given by the Convocation of
‘Canterbury a year before, respecting the steps to be
taken “if it be decided that a New Bishop should
be consecrated” for the Diocese of Natal.

After the Gloria in Excelsis had been sung by the
assembled Bishops, the Primate dismissed the Con-
ference with the Benediction, on the understanding
that those members of it who could remain in
England should reassemble in December to receive
the Reports of the various Committees.

On the following day, Saturday, September 28,
thirty-four Bishops attended a closing service in
Lambeth Parish Church, when the Holy Communion
was celebrated by the Archbishop, and a sermon
was preached by Bishop Fulford, of Montreal. It
had originally been proposed that this service should
be held in Westminster Abbey; but Dean Stanley,
in a correspondence published at the time,! gave his
reasons for objecting to the use of the Abbey in the
manner proposed, and the Conference fell back on
Lambeth Church as an alternative.

The several Committees were in frequent session
during the next two months under the direction of
Bishop Selwyn, of New Zealand ;? Bishop Fulford,
of Montreal; and Bishop Cotterill, of Grahamstown,
the last-named of whom had undertaken the
onerous work of “ Secretary of Committees” to the
Conference.

On December 10 a further session of the Con-
ference, or such members of it as had remained in

1 See Part II., No. X., p. ror.

2 Bishop Selwyn had been nominated in November, 1867, to
the See of Lichfield ; but he was not enthroned till January 9,
1868.

The Adjourned Session: December, 1867. 19

England, was held at Lambeth Palace, when eight
Reports were presented.!. With reference to the first
seven of these, a resolution was in each case formally
passed : “That this adjourned meeting of the Con-
ference receives the Report (No. —) of the Com-
mittee now presented, and directs the publication
thereof, commending it to the careful consideration
of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion, as
containing the result of the deliberations of that
Committee; and returns the members of the
same its thanks for the care with which they have
considered the various important questions referred
to them.”

Upon the presentation of Report No. VIII., which
referred to Bishop Colenso’s deposition, it was re-
solved “that the Report be received and printed ;
that the thanks of this meeting be given to the Com-
mittee for their labours, and that his Grace be
requested to communicate the Report to the Council
of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund.”

The further resolutions, which will be found in
full elsewhere,” were for the most part of a formal
character. It was, indeed, impossible, considering
the small number of Bishops who were able to
attend, that any important motions should at this
stage be brought before them. The session lasted
for a few hours only, and it became evident that in
any future Conference some different arrangement
must be adopted. Reiterated thanks were expressed
to the Bishops of Gloucester and Grahamstown, the
Episcopal Secretaries ; and to Mr. Philip Wright and
Mr. Isambard Brunel, who had acted as their lay
assistants and advisers. “The Conference had been
attended, in all, by seventy-six Bishops out of one
hundred and forty-four who had received invitations.
Of these seventy-six, eighteen were English Bishops,

* See Part II., No. XIL., p. r1o.
* See Part II., No. XIIL, p. 136.

20 Lambeth Conferences of 1867 and 1878.

five were Irish, and six were Scotch. The Colonial
Church sent twenty-four, including five Metropolitans.
The United States sent nineteen. At no one session
of the Conference were all the Bishops present, but
the Encyclical Address received the signatures of all,
and the President was subsequently authorised to
affix the names of several others who had been re-
luctantly prevented from attending.!

CHAPTER II.
THE SECOND CONFERENCE. 1878.

HE circumstances in which the first Conference

had been held were exceptionally difficult, and

some of the interests at stake were of so keen and
even personal a sort that the Bishops found it hard
to give undistracted attention to the wider questions
of policy and practice which had been included in
Archbishop Longley’s programme. The allotted
time also had been far too short for dealing ade-
quately with such subjects. Eight Committees had
indeed reported ; but their Reports, as has been seen,
were presented to less than a score of Bishops at
one brief session on a single day. | Due discussion
of them was thus impossible, and Bishop Selwyn,
who had been foremost perhaps among the promoters

1 See Part II., No. XIII., p. 138.

A Second Conference asked for. 21

of the gathering, could only suggest the postpone-
ment to a future Conference of any debate upon
these weighty documents.!

The inquiry soon became common, Will there be
a second Conference, and if so, when? ' Once again,
as in 1865, it was the Canadian Church which took
the first .official step. In December, 1872, the
Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada
made formal appeal to the Convocation of Canter-
bury to join with them in a request to Archbishop
Tait, who had in 1869 succeeded to the Primacy,
that he would summon as soon as possible a second
meeting of the Conference.’

Taking this Canadian letter as his text, Bishop
Selwyn, in a memorable speech in Convocation,
endorsed and expanded the appeal. He had visited
America in 1871. He was to pay a second and more
formal visit in 1874, and his experience in every part
of the world led him to long for such confederation
and unity of action as could, he believed, be best
secured by a second Conference, or, as he called it,
“ A General Council of the Bishops of the Anglican
Communion, to carry on the work begun by the
Lambeth Conference of 1867,”

The matter was, by common consent, adjourned
for a time ; and in the following year (1874) Bishop
Kerfoot, of Pittsburgh, as representing the American
Church, was in constant communication upon the
subject with Archbishop Tait, whom he visited at
Addington, and to whom he was authorised to write
officially from America.t The Bishop of Lichfield’s
formal attendance in that year at the meetings, first

1 See eg., Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 13, 1873,
p. 172.

2 See Part II., No. XIV., p. 139.

% See Chronicle of Convocation, Feb. 13, 1873, pp.
168-174.

* See Part II., No. XV., p.141, and “Life of Bishop Kerfoot,”
vol. ii., pp. 581-587.

22 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

of the Provincial Synod of Canada and then of the
General Convention in New York,' brought the
question again into prominence, and it had now
become practically certain that a second Conference
would be held in 1877 or 1878 if the necessary con-
ditions could be agreed upon.

Some of these conditions were suggested by the
Canadian House of Bishops ;” others were laid down
by the Archbishop himself in an important Con-
vocation speech, and in his written reply to a formal
request signed by no less than 42 Bishops of the
American Church.? Speaking in Convocation on
April 16, 1875, he said :—

“No one can doubt that very great good has
arisen from the friendly intercourse which took place
during the last Lambeth Conference. At the same
time, it must be remembered that it is a serious.
matter to gather the Bishops together from all parts
of the globe, unless there is some distinct object for
their so gathering. I therefore am disposed, by the
advice of my brethren, to request that our brethren
at home, and also those at a distance, will state to
me as explicitly as possible what the subjects are that
it is desirable to discuss at such meeting. They are
of a somewhat limited character. There is no inten-
tion whatever on the part of anybody to gather
together the Bishops of the Anglican Church for the
sake of defining any matter of doctrine. Our doc-
trines are contained in our formularies, and our
formularies are interpreted by the proper judicial
authorities, and there is no intention whatever at any
such gathering that questions of doctrine should be
submitted for interpretation in any future Lambeth
Conference any more than they were at the previous
Lambeth Conference. My predecessor had a very

' See “ Life of Bishop Selwyn,” vol. ii., pp. 319-324.
2 See Part II., No. XVLI., p. 148.
° See Part ΝΟ XV., p. 144.

Archbishop Taits Speech in Convocation. 23

difficult. task in defining the exact duty of the
Bishops who came together on the former occasion,
and with great firmness, and at the same time with
that remarkable courtesy and kindliness for which he
was so eminent, he steered the somewhat difficult
course which was before him, and it was distinctly
settled that matters of that kind were not to be
entered upon. Well, then, with regard to discipline,
of course our discipline is exercised by ourselves
and by the constituted Courts of the Church at
home, and the discipline of the various Colonial and
more independent Churches is exercised by these
Churches according to fixed rules which have been
established by themselves, and we have no intention
whatever of interfering with these matters of dis-
cipline. We are, therefore, perhaps naturally, anxious
to know tolerably distinctly the subjects which any
would wish to bring before us..... Friendly inter-
course must, of course, be of great value. But it is
possible that Bishops at a very great distance—such
as the Bishop of Athabasca, who, I believe, can
scarcely reach his diocese under a year—might per-
haps, under a misapprehension, think it was neces-
sarily their duty to come to such a Conference unless
it was distinctly stated what was to be done.....
I cannot doubt that there are many points respecting
the connection between the Mother Church and the
Colonial Churches on which a friendly Conference
would be very valuable indeed. ....... With
regard to our brethren in America, no such difficulties
exist: what we enjoyed so much during the late
Conference was the friendly intercourse and exchange
of sentiment between us and them. We have no
desire to interfere with their affairs, and I am sure
they have no desire to interfere with ours. As far as
they are concerned, I think it would be a work of
love in which we should be engaged—the extension
of Christ’s kingdom—and that we may be able by
friendly intercourse to strengthen each other’s hands

24 Lambeth Conference 07 1878.

But I think it important that there should be no mis-
understanding, and none of that difficulty which, I
am bound to say, did exist at the last Lambeth
Conference as to what subjects might and what
subjects might not be introduced ; that we should
know what it is that our brethren wish to bring
before us, and what we wish to bring before them,
before they give themselves the trouble of coming
from the ends of the earth, happy as the results of
such a meeting are, under God’s Providence, likely
bo ‘be.”

Fortified by the concurrence of the Northern Con-
vocation,” which had held aloof in 1867, the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury issued a formal letter on
March 28th, 1876, to all the Bishops of the Anglican
Communion, intimating his readiness to hold a Con-
ference in 1878, “if it shall seem expedient, after the
opinions of all our brethren have been ascertained,”
and inviting an expression of opinion. These letters
to the Bishops throughout the world were not, as
heretofore, sent direct from Lambeth ; but were for-
warded to the various Metropolitans and presiding
Bishops, with a request that they would transmit
them officially to the Bishops entitled to receive
them in each branch or Province of the Church—a
rule which has since been followed in all similar
circulars of an official kind.

Before the close of the year about ninety letters
of reply were received by the Archbishop, from all
parts of the world, showing, as had been anticipated,
an overwhelming preponderance of opinion in favour
of a second Conference, provided a longer period of
session could be arranged for than “the four short
days” of 1867.

1 See Chronicle of Convocation, April 16, 1875, pp.
132-134.

* For the formal resolution passed in the Convocation of
York on Feb. 26, 1875, see Part II., No. XVII., p. 150.

Ξ See Part II., No. XVIII, p. 151.

A rchbishop Tait’s Invitation. 25

Most of the Bishops also suggested subjects for
discussion, and on these the Archbishop took counsel
with an Episcopal Committee, and especially with
Bishop Selwyn. After the fullest deliberation, the
following definite invitation was issued :—

LAMBETH PALACE,
July 10, 1877.

RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER,

It is proposed to hold a Conference of Bishops of
the Anglican Communion, at this place, beginning
on Tuesday, the second day of July, eighteen hundred
and seventy-eight.

The Conference, it is proposed, shall extend over
four weeks; the first week, of Four Sessions, to be
devoted to discussions, in Conference, of the subjects
submitted for deliberation; the second and third
weeks to the consideration of these subjects in
Committees ; and the fourth week to final discussions
in Conference, and to the close of the meeting.

The subjects seiected for discussion are the fol-
lowing :—

_ I. The best mode of maintaining Union among
the various churches of the Anglican Communion.

2. Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches
to which such an arrangement may be applicable.

3. The relations to each other of Missionary
Bishops and of Missionaries, in various branches of
the Anglican Communion acting in the same
country.

4. The position of Anglican Chaplains and Chap-
laincies on the Continent of Europe and elsewhere.

5. Modern forms of infidelity, and the best means
of dealing with them. .

6. The condition, progress, and needs of the various
Churches of the Anglican Communion.

I shall feel greatly obliged if, at your early con-_
venience, you will inform me whether we may have

26 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

the pleasure of expecting your presence at the
Conference.
I am,
Right Reverend and dear Brother,
Yours faithfully in Christ,

A. C. CANTUAR.

It was evidently not without intention that the
subjects selected for discussion, though grouped
under such all-embracing headings, coincided in
some parts so closely with the Resolutions of the
Conference of 1867. The Reports presented in that
year had never, as has been seen, received adequate
discussion, nor had any one of them been “adopted”
by the Conference. By a recurrence to these sub-
jects a certain measure of continuity was secured,
and a basis was laid for the practical deliberations
of 1878. The plan adopted in 1867 of drafting and
publishing beforehand the Resolutions which were
to be moved, had not worked altogether well, and it
was arranged that in 1878 the formal motion should
in each case be for the appointment of a Committee
which, after considering some branch of the selected
subjects, should report to the Conference in its final
week of session.

One hundred and eight Bishops accepted the
Archbishop’s invitation. Some of these, however,
were at the last moment prevented from attending,
and the actual number present at the Conference was
exactly one hundred.!

On Saturday, June 29, St. Peter's Day, the pro-
ceedings of the Conference began with a gathering of
Bishops at Canterbury, for what had been described
as a “Service of Welcome” in the Cathedral.

Archbishop Tait, four weeks before, had lost his
only son, who had recently returned from a visit to
America, and the fear that the Archbishop would
himself be unable to attend the Service, which would

1 See Part II., No. XXIII., page 204.

The Welcome-at Canterbury. 27

thus be deprived of much of its interest and com-
pleteness, kept away many Bishops who had intended
to be present. The Archbishop, however, went to
Canterbury as arranged, and was met by thirty-six
Bishops,! and an immense gathering of clergy.

A service was held in the morning in St. Augus-
tine’s Missionary College, with a sermon by Bishop
Cleveland Coxe, of Western New York, and at the
Special Evensong in the Cathedral at three o’clock,
the Archbishop gave an official welcome to the
assembled Bishops. The ancient marble throne,
known as “St. Augustine’s Chair,” was moved from
its ordinary position in the south transept, and placed
in the centre of the altar steps. The Bishops were
grouped on either side of it, and the Archbishop
addressed them as follows :—

“My brothers, representatives of the Church
throughout the world, engaged in spreading the
Gospel of Jesus Christ wherever the sun shines, I
esteem it a very high privilege to welcome you here
to-day, to the cradle of Anglo-Saxon Christianity. . .
I am addressing you from St. Augustine’s chair.
This thought carries us back to the time when that
first missionary to our Anglo-Saxon forefathers,
amid much discouragement, landed on these _bar-
barous shores. More than twelve centuries and
a-half have rolled on since then. The seed he sowed
has borne an abundant harvest, and this great British
nation, and our sister beyond the ocean, have cause
to render thanks to God for the work begun by him
here. And how full of encouragement to you is St.
Augustine’s work. What difficulties greater than
those that confronted him can stand in your path ?
And you have blessings that he had not. You stand
nearer the pure primitive Christianity of the Apostles.
You have a motive power to touch the heart denied

* Nearly all of these came from abroad. Only three of the
home Diocesans were present.

28 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

ἐν. ee The varied history of the Church has
recorded many failures and many successes, and we
learn from the past neither to be elated by the one
nor discouraged by the other. The monuments
which surround us speak of a chequered history.
They tell of dark times and of great times. But
they all testify to the superintending power of God,
Who works all things according to the pleasure of
His will, after His own plan for the building up of

His one Kingdom in His own way............
It is my privilege to welcome you to Christ
Church, Canterbury... .. Gregory sent St. Augus-

tine here that he might mark England with the name
of Christ, “that Name which is above every name.”
God grant that that Name may be ever more and
more acknowledged among us; that its glories may
shine more and more brightly here, and in your dis-
tant dioceses, triumphing over all obstacles, and
reconciling all petty divisions, uniting all hearts in
the truth of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
My Brethren from across the Atlantic,—you espe-
cially from the great Republic,—to you a particular
welcome is due from me. Partly for our Church’s
sake, partly for my sake, partly also for something
you discerned in himself, you welcomed one very
dear to me last autumn.!. The bond that unites us
is not the less sacred because so many hopes of
earthly joy have withered and disappeared. God
unite us all more closely in His own great Family.
And now let us to prayer.”

At eleven o’clock, on Tuesday, July 2, the Bishops
met at Lambeth. They were marshalled in the
Guard-room, where the actual Sessions of 1867 had
been held, and passed thence in procession to the
Chapel, the Bishops from the United States walking
alongside of the English Diocesan Bishops as their

1 The Archbishop’s son, the Rev. Craufurd Tait, had been

formally welcomed by the House of Bishops assembled at
Boston on Oct. 5, 1877.

Opening of the Second Conference. 29

guests, all due precedence being given in the proces-
sional arrangements to the Metropolitans and pre-
siding Bishops.!. After the Venz Creator had been
sung, the Holy Communion was celebrated by the
Archbishop of Canterbury, assisted by the Bishops
of London, Winchester, Salisbury, and Rochester, as
officers of the Provincial College. With the excep-
tion of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Chaplains,”
none but Bishops were present in the Chapel. The
sermon was preached by the Archbishop of York,
the text being Galatians ii. 11: “ But when Peter was
come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because
he was to be blamed.”

The Sessions of the Conference were held in the
Great Library,not,as in 1867,in the Guard-room. The
arrangement of hours and subjects was as follows :—

(11am. Holy Communion and sermon
in Lambeth Palace Chapel.
Tuesday, 1.30 p.m. Archbishop’sopening address,

July 2. +2 pm—445 pm. Subject /.— The
best mode of maintaining union
among the various Churches of
4 the Anglican Communion.

(10.30a.m. Litany in Chapel.

Iram. Sudzect //—Voluntary Boards
of Arbitration for Churches to
which such an arrangement may

Wednesday, be applicable.

July 3. + 1.30 pm. Subject JJ//.—The relation
to each other of Missionary

Bishops and of Missionaries in

various Branches of the Anglican

Communion, acting in the same

4 country.

' See Part II., No. XXIV., p. 206.

* Archdeacon Fisher, Rev. F. G. Blomfield, Hon. and Rev.
W. H. Fremantle, Rev. W. F. Erskine Knollys, Rev. Randall
T. Davidson.

$ See Part II., No. XX., p. 154.

30 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

(10.30 a.m. Litany in Chapel.

Iram. Swdzect /V.—The position of
Anglican Chaplains and Chap-

Thursday, laincies on the Continent of

, Europe and elsewhere. |

1.30 p.m. Szbject V.i—Modern forms
of Infidelity, and the best means

Y of dealing with them.

(10.30am. Litany in Chapel.
Friday, | 11am. andi.3op.m. Sudject Vl—
July 5. 4 The condition, progress, and needs
| of the various Churches of the
@ Anglican Communion.

It was decided, almost unanimously, that the pro-
ceedings of the Conference should, as in 1867, be
private. A shorthand report was made of all the
speeches, and it was arranged that this should be
preserved by the Archbishop along with the other
manuscripts belonging to Lambeth Library, but
should in no way be made public.'

The secretarial work of the Conference was again,
as in 1867, under the charge of Bishops Ellicott and
Cotterill,? assisted by Dr. Isambard Brunel, and,
unofficially, by the Archbishop’s resident Chaplain.*
For the avoidance of discussions irrelevant to the
programme it was arranged, with general consent,
that if any memorials or petitions—and there were
not a few—should be forwarded to the Conference,
they should be placed, without further remark than
a bare statement of their purport, in the hands of the

1 A long account of the debates which had taken place in
1867 was unexpectedly published in the Guardian of June 19,
1878, under circumstances explained in a letter from the
Rev. W. Benham to the Archbishop, which appeared in the
Guardian of the following week, June 26, 1878, p. goo.

2 Bishop of Grahamstown 1856-1871 ; Bishop of Edinburgh
1871-1886.
~ § The Rey. R. T, Davidson.

The Conference Committees : 1878. 31

President, and that the memorialists should be
informed that in no case could any answer be
returned.

In the opening debates during the first week the
formal motion was in each case for the appointment
of a Committee to consider the particular subject
under discussion, and to report to the Conference
during the closing week of Session. On the final
and very wide subject—(No. VI.)—“ The condition,
progress, and needs of the various Churches of the
Anglican Communion,” the order was varied by
the appointment of an influential Committee presided
over by the Archbishop of Canterbury, which sat
de die in diem at Lambeth, “to receive questions
submitted in writing by Bishops desiring the advice
of the Conference on difficulties or problems they
have met with in their several Dioceses.”

The various Committees met at Lambeth, Fulham,
Farnham, and elsewhere during the fortnight which
intervened between the first and last groups of
Sessions, and their Reports were, for the most part,
ready when the Conference re-assembled in Lambeth
Library on Monday, July 22nd. Onsubject No. V.
alone—* Modern forms of Infidelity, and the best
means of dealing with them,’—the Committee, as
was natural, announced that they had not found it
possible to prepare in the time allotted for their
deliberations a detailed Report upon 80. vast a
question. ‘To judge, however, from the published
opinions of the Bishops present at the Conference!
the debates upon this subject were among the most
useful of any that took place.

As the outcome of much discussion it was decided
that the Reports, when adopted by the Conference,
should be incorporated as a whole in a combined

' See, for example, “‘The Second Lambeth Conference: A
Personal Narrative,” by Bishop Stevens Perry, of Iowa,
pp. 27, &c.

32 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

“ Letter,” and put forth to the world in the name of
the hundred Bishops assembled. This course was
rendered possible by the almost complete unanimity
with which the five Reports in their ultimate shape
received the imprimatur of the Conference. Bishop
Wordsworth of Lincoln, who, as Archdeacon of
Westminster, had in 1867 translated into Greek and
Latin the Address then published! undertook in like
manner to make translations of this document of
1878, condensing or omitting such portions of the
Reports as would be inappropriate or uninteresting
to those outside the Anglican Communion.?

The final paragraphs of the official letter, which
will be found in its complete form elsewhere,’ were as
follows :—

“These are the Reports of the Conference, and the
practical conclusions at which we have arrived.
Some of these conclusions have reference to the
special circumstances of different branches of the
One Church of Christ, according to peculiarities of
their various missionary work for the heathen, or
their labours among their own people ; some embody
principles which apply to all-branches of the Church
Universal. They are all limited in their scope to
those subjects which have been distinctly brought
before the assembled Bishops. We invite to them
the attention of the various Synods and other
governing powers in the several Churches, and of all
the faithful in Christ Jesus throughout the world.

“We do not claim to be lords over God’s heritage,
but we commend the results of this our Conference
to the reason and conscience of our brethren as en-
lightened by the Holy Spirit of God, praying that
all throughout the world who call upon the Lord
Jesus Christ may be of one mind, may be united in

' See Part II., No. VIIL, p. 92.
2 See Part II., No. XXII., p. 191.
* See Part II., No. XXI. p. 163.

Closing Service in St. Paul’s Cathedral. 33

one fellowship, may hold fast the Faith once delivered
to the Saints, and worship their one Lord in the
spirit of purity and love.

“ Signed on behalf of the Conference,
“A.C. CANTUAR.”

The Letter having been thus formally signed, the
Gloria in Excelsis was sung by the assembled
Bishops, the Benediction was pronounced, and the
deliberations of the Conference were at an end.

On the following day (Saturday, July 27) a grand
closing service was held in St. Paul’s Cathedral. The
Bishops who were able to be present—about eighty-
five in number—received the Archbishop of Canter-
bury at the West door, and the hymn, “ The Church’s
One Foundation,” was sung as the long procession
walked up thenave. The Ze Deum! followed, and the
Holy Communion was then celebrated by the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, who was assisted in the service
and administration by the Bishops of London, Moray
and Ross, Sydney, Montreal, Christ Church (New
Zealand), Capetown, Rupertsland, and Delaware.
The sermon was preached by Bishop Stevens, of
Pennsylvania, from the text, “I, if I be lifted up
from the earth, will draw all men unto Me” (St.
John xii. 32).2. The service over, the Bishops
assembled in the apse of the Cathedral, when a few
farewell words were spoken by the Archbishop. “I
feel confident,” he said, “ that the effect of our gather-
ing will be that the Church at home and abroad will
be strengthened by the mutual counsel which we
have taken together. May the blessing of Almighty
God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost
attend each one of us in our several spheres when
we depart from this place. On behalf of the Bishops

1 Stainer in E flat.
* See Part II., No. XXV., p. 208.

34. Lambeth Conferences of 1878 and 1888.

of England I offer to those of our brethren who have
come hither from foreign lands our heartfelt thanks,
and bid them, in the name of God, Farewell!”

So ended the second Lambeth Conference. It had
been attended, as has been seen, by exactly one
hundred Bishops. Thirty-five of these were English,!
nine were Irish, seven were Scottish, thirty were
Colonial and Missionary, and nineteen belonged to
the Church of the United States.” The expenses of
the Conference, so far as they did not devolve upon
the Archbishop of Canterbury, were defrayed by the
English Diocesan Bishops. A committee of laymen,
under the guidance of Mr. J. G. Talbot, M.P., under-
took to arrange for all possible hospitality to the
American and Colonial Bishops. This organization,
however, as well as the visits paid to the English
Universities and Cathedral cities, lay altogether out-
side the official arrangements for the Conference.

CHAPTER ITI.
THE THIRD ‘CONFERENCE, 1888.

T was virtually settled at the Conference of 1878.
that a third Conference should be held at
Lambeth, ten years later, and the death of Arch-
bishop Tait,on December 3, 1882, made no difference
in these arrangements.

- 1 Namely, two Archbishops, twenty-six English Diocesans,
three Bishops Suffragan, and four ex-Colonial Bishops holding
‘*Commissions” in England.

2 For the numbers attending the Conference of 1867, see
above, page 19.

Invitation to the Conference of 1888. 35

In July, 1886, Archbishop Benson issued the
following formal letter, which was sent, as on pre-
vious occasions, through the various Metropolitans
and Presiding Bishops, to all members of the
Anglican Episcopate “exercising superintendence
over Dioceses, or lawfully commissioned to exercise
Episcopal functions therein ” :—

“RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER,

“There appears to be a general desire that a Con-
ference of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion
should again be held at Lambeth within the next
few years.

“T have accordingly decided (following the prece-
dents of 1867 and 1878) to issue next year an invi-
tation to such a Conference, which would assemble,
according to our present plan, in the summer of 1888.

“Tt will be of material assistance to myself and to
those who are good enough to co-operate with me
in making the necessary arrangements, if you can,
at your early convenience, inform me whether it
seems to you probable that you will be able to take
part in our deliberations, and whether there are any
subjects of general importance which appear to you
specially appropriate for discussion in the Conference.

“T am in hopes that the suggestions which may
reach me in answer to this circular letter will enable
me to issue, next spring, the formal invitations to
the Conference, together with an intimation as to the
definite subjects which will, in the following year,
come before us for discussion.

“1 have made these preliminary arrangements in
conjunction with the Archbishop of York and the
English Bishops, and I am glad to be able to inform
you that the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, whose
efficient aid as hon. Episcopal Secretary both in
1867 and 1878 will be gratefully remembered, has
again kindly consented to act in that capacity. We

36 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

have associated with him as Hon. Assistant Secretary
the Dean of Windsor, who, as resident chaplain to
Archbishop Tait, was responsible for many of the
arrangements of the Conference of 1878.

“Tt is not necessary that I should assure you of
our earnest desire that you will unite with us in
humble prayer to Almighty God that His guidance
and blessing may be vouchsafed in rich measure,
both to our ultimate deliberations and to the arrange-
ments necessary to secure their efficiency.

“1 remain,
“Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ,
“ EDw: CANTUAR:

In the twenty years that had elapsed since the first
Conference, the number of Bishops entitled to
receive an invitation had increased from 144 to 200,
and nine more were added before the third Conference
actually assembled. Most of the Bishops, in replying,
suggested subjects for discussion, and these sugges-
tions were examined with the utmost care by the
Archbishop. of Canterbury, and by other Bishops
whose assistance he invited. The result of this
examination was the following formal letter, sent
through the Metropolitans as before :—

“ LAMBETH PALACE,
“ἐ oth November, 1888.

“ RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER,

“Tam now able to send you definite information
with regard to the Conference of Bishops of the
Anglican Communion to be held at Lambeth, if God
permit, in the summer of next year.

“In accordance with the precedent of 1878, it has
been arranged that the Conference shall assemble on
Tuesday, July 3rd, 1888. After four days’ session
there will be an adjournment, in order that the
various Committees appointed by the Conference

Programme of the Third Conference. 37

may have opportunity of deliberation. The Con-
ference will re-assemble on Monday, July 23rd, or
Tuesday, July 24th, and will conclude its session on
Friday, July 27th.

“ Information as to the Services to be held in con-
nection with the Conference, and other particulars
will be made public as the time draws near.

“JT have received valuable suggestions from my
Episcopal brethren in all parts of the world as to the
subjects upon which it is thought desirable that we
should deliberate.

“These suggestions have been carefully weighed
by myself and by the Bishops who have been good
enough to co-operate with me in making the pre-
liminary arrangements, and the following are the
subjects definitely selected for discussion :—

“J, The Church’s practical work in relation to (A)
Intemperance, (B) Purity, (Ὁ) Care of Emigrants,
(D) Socialism.

“TI. Definite Teaching of the Faith to various
classes, and the means thereto.

“III. The Anglican Communion in relation to the
Eastern Churches, to the Scandinavian and other
Reformed Churches, to the Old Catholics, and
others. .

“TV. Polygamy of heathen converts. Divorce.

“V. Authoritative standards of Doctrine and
Worship.

“VI. Mutual relations of Dioceses and Branches of
the Anglican Communion.

“May I venture again to invite your earnest
prayer that the Divine Head of the Church may be
pleased to prosper with His blessing this our
endeavour to promote His glory, and the advance-
ment of His Kingdom upon earth.

“1 remain,
“Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ,
«ἘΌΝ: CANTUAR:”

38 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No less than 147 Bishops signified their intention
of being present at the Conference. One of these died
after accepting the invitation.! Three others were at
the last moment prevented from leaving their Dioceses.
On the other hand, two Bishops were consecrated 3
during the actual month of Conference, and the total
number who took part in its deliberations was thus
145. This was proportionally a much larger at-
tendance than at either of the previous Conferences.
In 1867, 144 Bishops were invited, and 76 attended.
In 1878, 173 were invited, and 100 attended. In
1888, 211 were invited, and 145 attended. |

The official proceedings began, as in 1878, witha
service held at Canterbury, on Saturday, June 30.
After hospitable entertainment in St. Augustine’s
Missionary College, the Bishops assembled and robed
in the Chapter-house, and walked in procession
through the cloisters to the great west door of the
Cathedral, where they were received by the Arch-
bishop, and by the Cathedral Clergy. The Arch-
bishop was attended by his Chaplains, but the ar-
rangements as to space in the choir of the Cathedral
did not admit of such attendance in the case of the
other Bishops. As the long procession, including,
besides the Bishops, the members of the Cathedral
body, the City clergy, and the Mayor and Corpora-
tion of Canterbury, moved up the nave and
choir, Psalm Ixviii. was chanted, and the hymn
“Onward, Christian Soldiers,’ sung. The Bishops,
about a hundred in number, were ranged on either
side upon the altar-steps, and the Archbishop took
his place in St. Augustine’s Chair, which had once
again been placed for the purpose in the centre of
the altar-steps. The Ze Dezm having been chanted,
the Archbishop, seated in his chair, delivered the
following address :—

1 The Bishop of Fond du Lac, U.S.A.
2 The Bishops of Bedford and Leicester.

Archbishop Benson's Address. 39

“ Brethren most dear, and to me most reverend, few
privileges of my office can surpass that which, though
unworthy, I exercise to-day. It is to bid you welcome
in the name of the Lord. Happy should my soul be
if it were given me to take in all that such welcome
means. Welcome from all continents, and seas, and
shores, where the English tongue is spoken.
Welcome, bearers of the great commission to be
His witnesses unto the end of the earth. Welcome, .
disciples of the great determination to ‘refuse fables,’
and seek the inspiration of the Church at the
fountain-head of inspired reason. Welcome to the
chair, which, when filled least worthily, most takes
up its own parable, and speaks of unbroken lines
of government and law and faith, and forgets not
the yet earlier Christianity of the land whose own
lines soon flowed into and blended with the Romaii
and the Gallic and the Saxon strains. Round this
chair have clustered the glorious memorials you see
through ages, none more dear than his who spoke
from it last with a pathos and courage quite his own
His simple words to you, our brethren of the great
Republic, ‘the particular welcome from himself,
which his great sorrow and your love privileged him
to give you, still shed a tender human light upon the
solemn matters we are to treat of, and the heavenly
enterprises to which we and our successors are
pledged. We know how dear to you is this sanctuary
of our fathers and yours,—yes, of ‘your Father and
our Father. And even because of the potency of
its deep appeal to us to be holy in worship, pure in
doctrine, strong in life—even for this appeal’s sake
we bid you here rermnember the pregnant words of
Gregory to Augustine himself, ‘Non pro locis res,
sed pro bonis rebus loca amanda sunt.’ Love not the
things for the sake of the genius of the place, love
the place for the good things wrought there. This
he said in answer to Augustine’s question—‘ The
faith being one, are there different customs in

40 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

different Churches?’ The answer was worthy of
him who has been called the greatest of the Popes,
and called the first of the Methodists. He says, you
remember, ‘What thou hast found in any Church
more pleasing to the Almighty God, that do thou
solicitously choose out, and in the English Church,
young in the faith, pour in with excellent instruction
what thou gatherest from many Churches,’ For the ἡ
moment, while his Church was young, Augustine
stood in a strange, unique position, commissioned to
represent in one person the very Church itself which
sent him, and bound to represent the future Church
for which he was responsible. Were not the words
prophetic and characteristic? The task assigned him
has surely fulfilled itself in the manifoldness of his
Church, the embracingness, the comprehensiveness,
and the integrity of her spirit—the versatility with
which she enters into the life of new nations, the
readiness with which she receives them to herself,
the simplicity of the unvarying rule of her faith, yet
the steadfastness of the claim she makes for other
Churches, as well as for herself, that they may have
liberty in things doubtful or indifferent. We honour
her when we say she has all the right which the
most venerable Churches have to order her service of
God, as they did, “according to the diversities of
countries, times, and men’s manners,” so that nothing
be ordained against God’s word. We vindicate her
dignity when we say the right is hers, not ours.
It is for her to choose for’us, and not we for ourselves ;
for her in her lasting power, not for us separately in
our passing weakness. We honour her when we say
that her right is the right of all Churches, and of no
individuals. If this voice of Gregory to Augustine
be worked into the fabric of our Church, it may well
be the “sermon in stones” which we shall hear to-
day as the last echoes of the service tremble along
the arches, and seem to fancy’s ear to quiver with
anxiety to leave one true tone with us for comfort

Westminster Abbey Service, 1888. 41

“and for strength. It is this,—liberty for all the holy
_ Churches of God, loyal allegiance of Churchmen
each to his own.

Lastly, may He inspire and bless the work of all
believers, be they Churchmen or no, who love the
Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity and truth.”

Evensong followed, the Anthem being Mendels-
sohn’s “ The Sorrows of Death,” and the Hymn,
“ The Church’s one Foundation.” As the great pro-
cession moved outwards from the choir, the Arch-
bishop pronounced the Benediction a second time |
over the multitude assembled in the nave.

A second great service was held in Westminster
Abbey on Monday evening, July 2nd, when the
Sermon was preached by the Archbishop of Canter-
bury, who took for his text Ephesians iv. τό, “ All
the body, fitly framed and knit together, through
that which every joint supplieth.” !

Nearly all the Bishops who had accepted the invi-

tation to the Conference were present at this service,
each attended by his Chaplain. They were mar- .
shalled in long procession at the west end of the
nave, and during the service were seated in the choir
and under the lantern, the general congregation
occupying the transepts. The Archbishops and
Metropolitans, with their Chaplains, had places
assigned them in the sacrarium. The special Psalms
and Lessons were: Psalms civ. cxlv. Isaiah xlix.
1-24. Acts ii. 1-22. Sterndale Bennett’s Anthem,
“God is a Spirit,’ and Bishop Cleveland Coxe’s
Hymn, “ Saviour, sprinkle many Nations,” had also
been specially chosen for the occasion.

On the following morning, Tuesday, July 3rd,
the Conference opened with a Celebration of Holy
Communion in Lambeth Palace Chapel, the intro-
ductory sermon or address being delivered by Bishop

' See Part II., No. XXVIIL., page 228.
a :

42 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Whipple, of Minnesota, who had been deputed to this
office by the Presiding Bishop of America, at the
request of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The
closing sentences of the sermon ! were as follows :—

“To none is this Council so dear as to those whose
lives are spent in the darkness of heathenism, or who
have gone out to new lands to lay foundation for
- the work of the Church of God. In loneliness, with
deferred hopes, neglected by brethren, your only
refuge to cry as a child to God, it is a joy for you to
feel the beating of a brother’s heart, and hear the
music of a brother’s voice, and kneel with brothers at
the dear old trysting-place, the Table of our Lord.
Let us consecrate all we haveand are to Him ; let us
remember loved ones far away; let us gather the
work we have so long garnered in cur hearts and lay
it at His feet. We shall not have met in vain if out
of the love learned of Him we give each to other
and to all fellow-labourers for Him a brother’s love, a
brother’s sympathy, and a brother’s prayers. I do
not know how to clothe in words the thronging
memories which cluster round us in this holy place,
what searchings of heart, what cries to God, what
communions with Christ, what consolations of the
Holy Spirit, have been witnessed in this sacred
place. I cannot call over the long roll of saints,
confessors, and martyrs, whose ‘names are written in
the Lamb’s Book of Life. Two names will be re-
membered to-day by us all. One that gentle Arch-
bishop Longley, who in the greatness of his love saw
with a prophet’s eye the mission of the Church, and
planned these Conferences, that our hearts might beat
as one in the battle of the last time. The other, the
wisest of counsellors, and the most loving of brethren,
the great-hearted Archbishop Tait, whose dying
legacy to his brethren was ‘love one another. They

1 See Part II., No. XXIX., page 241.

Meeting of the Conference, 1888. 43

have finished their course and entered into rest. A
tittle more work, a few more trials, and we, too, shall
finish our course. We are not two companies: the
militant and triumphant are one. We are the
advance and rear of one host, travelling to the
Canaan of God’s rest. God grant that we, too, may
so follow Christ that we may have an abundant
entrance to His eternal kingdom.”

The historic chapel was filled to overflowing by
the Bishops in their robes, no one else being
present, except the Chaplains of the Archbishop of
Canterbury. He was himself the Celebrant, assisted
by his Provincial Officers, the Bishops of London,
Winchester, Rochester, Lincoln, and Salisbury.

The order of procession adopted at all these ser-
vices was the same, and was simpler than that of the
former Conferences. Due precedence was given to
* Archbishops, to Metropolitans and Presiding Bishops,
and to the Bishops of London, Durham, and Win-
chester, all other Bishops without distinction being
arranged according to date of consecration.!

The great Library had been prepared, as in 1878,
for the sessions of the Conference, a low platform
having on this occasion been specially erected, with
places for the three Archbishops and the seven
Metropolitans, in a semi-circle on either side of the
President’s chair.

The secretarial work was, for the third time,
undertaken by the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol,?
who was assisted by the Dean of Windsor,? and the
Archdeacon of Maidstone,* the last-named having
been added as Assistant-Secretary a few weeks
before the Conference, owing to the unexpected
pressure of correspondence.

* See Part II., No. XXXI., page 256.
2 The Right Rev. Ὁ. J. Ellicott, D.D.
* The Very Rev. Randall T. Davidson, M.A.
* The Ven. B. F. Smith, M.A.
D2

44 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

A shorthand writer, as on the two previous occa-
sions, made a verbatim report of all the discussions
for preservation at Lambeth.

The proceedings during the first week of session
followed exactly upon the lines laid down by Arch-
bishop Tait in 1878. Certain speakers had been
selected, specially qualified to open the several dis-
cussions, the motion being in each case for the
appointment of a Committee to consider the par-
ticular subject, and to report to the Conference in its.
closing week of session, Twelve such Committees
were appointed in all, some of the subjects being,
by general consent, divided into two, or varied
in form from the wording of the official agenda
paper.

A strong “Committee of Reference” was appointed
in case any important questions, not covered by the
programme, should be suggested, in the form of
questions, for consideration and reply. But its work
was light, and had reference mainly to the procedure
of the Conference itself. In accordance with the.
unanimous recommendation of this Committee, it was
decided that no attempt should be made to secure the
“adoption ” of the various Reports presented by the
Committees, but that formal resolutions should in
each case be moved by the several Chairmen.

The memorials and petitions which arrived each
day were notified to the Conference by the President’s
direction, but it was made clear, as on former occa-
sions, that no answer could in any case be returned.

The Committees met frequently during the fort-
night which intervened between the two weeks of
full session. Some of them were accommodated in
the newly-opened “ Church House,” in Dean’s Yard,
which was thus put in its first days to one of the
most important of the uses that its promoters had
in view. Other Committees met at Lambeth, at

1 See Part II., No. XXXV., page 285.

Sessions of Conference, 1888. “45

Farnham, at Ely, and at London House. When the
Conference re-assembled on Monday, July 23rd, the
Reports were all in print, and were circulated in
time for the respective discussions.

The substitution of carefully-worded resolutions
in place of motions for the actual “adoption” of the
several Reports worked very successfully. It was
agreed that when any of the minority desired it, the
numbers voting for and against the adoption of any
of the resolutions ultimately carried should be made
public. But in the case of three only, out of the
thirty-two resolutions of the Conference,' was sucha
request made. Resolutions or amendments lost on
a division were not made public in any form. It was
also decided that the Reports of the Committees,
though not: formally adopted, should, unless other-
wise decided by vote of Conference, be printed and
circulated with the official resolutions. The names
of the members of Committee were to be printed on
the Reports, which were all, however, to be prefaced
by a note, for the protection of minorities, pointing
out that the Reports had not in all cases been
unanimously adopted by the Committees responsible
for them.

The Archbishop of Canterbury was requested to
draft, with such assistance as he might invite, an
Encyclical Letter, embodying the results of the deli-
berations of the Conference in a form suited for
general circulation. This was done, and on the last
day of session, Friday, July 27th, the draft Encyclical
Letter was considered, paragraph by paragraph, and,
after certain alterations had been made, the Arch-
bishop was. requested, without one dissentient voice,
to sign it on behalf of the Conference. An
Address to the Queen,’ which had lain in the gallery

1 Part Il., No. XXXIV., page 277.
2 Part II., No. XXXIII., page 264.
> Part II., No. XXX., page 252.

46 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

for signature during the sessions of the Conference
was formally read by the Archbishop, and the
Conference closed with the Doxology and Bene-
diction.

A solemn valedictory and thanksgiving service was
held next day in St. Paul’s Cathedral. It was
attended not only by the Bishops,! and their chap-
lains, but by the Lower Houses of Convocation both
of Canterbury and York, by the House of Lay-
men of the Province of Canterbury, and by the legal
and other officers of the Primate. All these walked
in procession from the west door of the Cathedral to
the choir. The service consisted of Holy Commu-
nion and Sermon, followed by a grand Te Deum,
The Celebrant was the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The Bishop of Minnesota read the Epistle; the
Bishop of London the Gospel. The Sermon was
preached by the Archbishop of York, who took as his
text Romans viii. 19, “The earnest expectation of
the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons
of God.” 3

An enormous congregation crowded the space
under the dome, as well as the nave, transepts, and
both aisles. The service lasted more than three
hours. After the Ze Deum, the long procession
returned to the west door, and the third Lambeth
Conference was at an end.

Of the 145 Bishops who took part in it, 46
belonged to England and Wales,‘ 11 to Ireland, 6 to
Scotland, 29 to the United States of America, and 53
to Colonial and Missionary Dioceses throughout the
world.

1 About 130 Bishops were present.
2 Gounod.

3 Part II., No. XXXVII., page 364.
4 Viz., 32 Diocesan Bishops, 8 Bishops Suffragan, and 6
ex-Colonial Bishops holding Commissions in England.

Close of the third Conference. 47

Warm thanks were tendered to all those on whom
the business arrangements of the Conference had
devolved ; and, not least, to the Committee of lay-
men who had again, as in 1878, under Mr. Talbot’s
guidance, made themselves responsible for the orga-
nisation of the hospitality offered to American and
Colonial Bishops. Mr. Tallents acted as Hon.
Secretary of this important Committee.

The Encyclical Letter and Reports were imme-
diately published by the Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge, and obtained a wide and rapid
circulation, more than 18,000 having been sold
before the close of the year.

The Encyclical Letter and the Resolutions of the
Conference were translated into Greek and Latin by
Bishop Wordsworth of Salisbury, who thus carried
on the work undertaken on the two previous occasions
by his father, the Bishop of Lincoln. These versions
are reproduced below.!

The foregoing narrative has dealt simply with the
three Conferences in their bare official aspect. The
indirect results which accrue from such gatherings
are probably at least as great as those of an official
kind. For an estimate of these indirect results, how-
ever, and for the impression made by the debates of
the earlier Conferences upon those who attended
them, the reader must turn to the accounts which
have been published in ample number in the
Biographies of Bishops on both sides of the Atlantic.®

The keen interest aroused on every side by the
Conference of 1888 has given evidence enough, were

1 See Part II., No. XXXVIIL., page 376.

2 Z.g., Lives of Bishops Sumner, Gray, Hopkins, Ewing
Selwyn, Kerfoot, Wilberforce, Wordsworth, &c.

48 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

such required, that those who planned in faith and
courage the first of these decennial gatherings were
right in believing that ἃ solid gain must follow, not to
the Anglican Communion only, but to the Church of
Christ throughout the world.

ΓΝ 11.

Letters and Documents wllustrating
the Lflistory of the Lambeth

Conferences.

Letter from the Canadian» Church. 51

No. I. (See page 10.)

Addresses from the Provincial Synod of the United
Church of England and Ireland in Canada,
assembled at Montreal in September, 1865; with
the Reply of the Archbishop of Canterbury.

To the Most Reverend the Archbishop, the Right
Reverend the Bishops, and the Reverend the
Clergy of the Convocation of the Province of
Canterbury.

We, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Cana-
dian Branch of the United Church of England and
Ireland, in Synod assembled, would approach your
Venerable Body with the deepest sentiments of
reverence and affection.

We are engaged, like yourselves, in endeavouring,
in this distant dependency of the Crown, to uphold
the truth of Religion, as our Common Church main-
tains it, and that Apostolic Order which is so
essential a safeguard in the preservation and diffusion
of the Catholic Faith. Recent declarations in high
places in our Mother-land, in reference to the position
of the Colonial Branches of the Mother Church, have
created amongst us feelings of regret and apprehen-
sion, as tending to shake the conviction, always so
dear to us, that we in the Colonies were, in all
respects, one with the Church of our parent country.

No statute or decision, we beg solemnly to assure
you, much as it may serve to weaken our outward
connection with the Church of our fathers, can impair

52 - Lambeth Conference of 1867.

the integrity and vigour of those principles in
doctrine and fellowship which constitute her inward
life. We are one with her in the great Articles of
Christian Belief, and one with her in that Episcopal
Order which binds her members in unity throughout
the world.

In desiring most earnestly to retain this connec-
tion, we believe that it would be most effectually
preserved and perpetuated if means could be adopted
by which the members of our Anglican Communion
in all quarters of the world should have a share in
the deliberations for her welfare, and be permitted to
have a representation in one General Council of her
members gathered from every land. Deeply affected
by the threat of isolation which recent declarations
-in high places have indicated, we earnestly solicit
this measure of relief, as maintaining that test
of inward communion which is to us the most
precious.

But while we look with hope to such concession,
we readily affirm our belief that the manner and
measure of the relief and encouragement we solicit
will be left most wisely to the deliberate judgment of
those ancient Convocations of the Church to whom,
under God, the cause of true religion at home and
abroad is so largely indebted.

Dated at the City of Montreal, in the Province of
Canada, this twentieth day of September, in the year
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-
five.

F. MONTREAL, JAMES BEAVEN, D.D.,
Metropolitan, Prolocutor.

Letter from the Canadian Church. 53.

To His Grace Charles Thomas, Archbishop of Can-
terbury, D.D., Primate of all England, and
Metropolitan.

May it please your Grace,—

We, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the
Province of Canada, in Triennial Synod assembled,
desire to represent to your Grace, that in consequence
of the recent decisions of the Judicial Committee of
the Privy Council in the well-known case respecting
the Essays and Reviews, and also in the case of the
Bishop of Natal and the Bishop of Cape Town, the
minds of many members of the Church have been
unsettled or painfully alarmed; and that doctrines
hitherto believed to be Scriptural, and undoubtedly
held by the members of the Church of England and
Ireland, have been adjudicated upon by the Privy
Council in such a way as to lead thousands of our
brethren to conclude that, according to this decision,
it is quite compatible with membership in the Church
of England to discredit the historical facts of Holy
Scripture, and to disbelieve the eternity of future
punishment; moreover, we would express to your
Grace the intense alarm felt by many in Canada lest
the tendency of the revival of the active powers of
Convocation should leave us governed by canons
different from those in force in England and Ireland
and thus cause us to drift into the status of an inde
pendent branch of the Catholic Church—a result
which we would at this time most solemnly deplore.

In order, therefore, to comfort the souls of the
faithful, and reassure the minds of wavering members
of the Church, and to obviate, as far as may be, the
suspicion whereby so many are scandalised, that the
Church is a creation of Parliament, we humbly entreat
your Grace, since the assembling of a General Council
of the whole Catholic Church is at present imprac-
ticable, to convene a National Synod of the Bishops

54 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

of the Anglican Church at home and abroad, who,
attended by one or more of their presbyters or lay-
men, learned in ecclesiastical law, as their advisers,
may meet together, and, under the guidance of the
Holy Ghost, take such counsel and adopt such
measures as may be best fitted to provide for the
present distress in such Synod, presided over by
your Grace.

F,. MONTREAL, JAs. BEAVEN, D.D.,
Metropolitan, President. Prolocutor.

Reply of the Archbishop.

To the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Province of
Canada, lately assembled in their Triennial
Synod.

ADDINGTON PARK, December, 1865.

My Right Rev., Rev., dear Brethren,—

I have duly received the Address forwarded to
me by your Metropolitan, from the late Triennial
Provincial Synod of the Province of Canada, request-
ing me to convene a Synod of the Bishops of the
Anglican Church, both at home and abroad, in order
that they may meet together, and, under the guidance
of the Holy Ghost, take such counsel, and adopt such
measures, as may be best fitted to provide for the
present distress.

I can well understand your surprise and alarm at
the recent decisions of the Judicial Committee of the
Privy Council in grave matters bearing upon the
doctrine and discipline of our Church, and I can
comprehend your anxiety, lest the recent revival of
action in the two Provincial Convocations of Canter-
bury and York should lead to the disturbance of
those relations, which have hitherto subsisted between
the different branches of the Anglican Church.

Convocation Proceedings. 55

The meeting of such a Synod as you propose is:
not by any means foreign to my own feelings, and I
think it might tend to prevent those inconveniences,
the possibility of which you anticipate. I cannot,
however, take any step in so grave a matter without
consulting my episcopal brethren in both branches
of the United Church of England and Ireland, as
well as those in the different. colonies and depen-
dencies of the British Empire.

I remain, your faithful and affectionate friend and
brother in Christ,

C. T. CANTUAR,

Primate of All England.

No. II. (See page to.)

Proceedings of the Convocation of Canterbury with
respect to the Canadian Address of September,
1865.

On May 2, 1866, the Lower House unanimously
resolved, “That his Grace the President be respect-
fully requested to direct the appointment of a Com-
mittee to consider and report upon the Address of
the Canadian Branch of the United Church of
England and Ireland, dated at Montreal, Sep-
tember 20, 1865.”’—(Chronicle of Convocation, May 2,
1866, 2. 290.)

The President having granted this request, a Com-
mittee of fifteen members was appointed. The
Committee presented its report on June 29, 1866,
but the debate upon it was postponed until the fol-
lowing group of sessions.

On February 14, 1867, the Lower House, after a
prolonged discussion, agreed by a majority of 29 to
the following resolution :—

“That this House tenders its sincere thanks to the
Committee on the Address of the Canadian Church,

56 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

for the labour which they have bestowed on the
subject, and for the Report which they have framed
and presented to this House, and desires to convey
to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury a
respectful expression of an earnest desire that he
would be pleased to issue an invitation to all the
Bishops in communion with the Church of England
to assemble at such time and place, and accompanied
by such persons as may be deemed fit, for the pur-
pose of Christian sympathy and mutual counsel on
matters affecting the welfare of the Church at home
and abroad ; and that this resolution be forwarded to
the Upper House.”

A debate upon the subject took place in the Upper
House on the following day. No formal resolution
was proposed, but the Archbishop announced his
intention of acceding to the request which had been
made.—( Chronicle of Convocation, February 14.and 15,

1867, Dp. 767-793, 800-808.)

No; : HI: (Seb cdee ἕω

Official Arrangements for the Conference of Bishops of
the Anglican Communion, to be holden at Lambeth
Palace, on September 24, 1867, and following days.

First Day.—Tuesday, September 24, at eleven
o'clock, am. Prayers and Holy Communion.
Sermon, by the Bishop of Illinois.

General Subject for the Day's Discusston,

INTERCOMMUNION BETWEEN THE CHURCHES OF
THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION.

Opening Address of the President: specifying
the general principles and rules of the Conference,

Programme for Conference of 1867. 57

and inviting any introductory remarks from Home
Metropolitans and from distant Bishops.

General agreement as to the arrangement of the
time and subjects.

Resolution :—

We, Bishops of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church,
professing the faith of the primitive and undivided
Church, as based on Scripture, defined by the first
four General Councils,' and reaffirmed by the Fathers
of the English Reformation, now assembled by the
good providence of God at the Archiepiscopal Palace
of Lambeth, under the presidency of the Primate of
all England, desire, First, to give hearty thanks to
Almighty God for having thus brought us together
for common counsels, and united worship; Secondly,
we desire to express the deep sorrow with which we
view the divided condition of the flock of Christ
throughout the world; and, Lastly, we do here
solemnly declare our belief that the best hope of
future reunion will be found in drawing each of us
for ourselves closer to our common Lord, in giving
ourselves to much prayer and intercession, in the
cultivation of a spirit of charity, and in seeking to
diffuse through every part of the Christian com-
munity that desire and resolution to return to the
faith and discipline of the undivided Church which
was the principle of the English Reformation.

Resolution :—
Notification of New Sees and Bishops.

That it appears to us expedient, for the purpose
of maintaining brotherly intercommunion, that all
cases of establishment of new Sees, and appoint-
ment of new Bishops, be notified to all Archbishops
and Metropolitans of the Home and Colonial Church

1 See 1 Eliz., c. 1. xxxvi.
E

58 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

‘of England and Ireland, the Primus of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in Scotland, and the Presiding
Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the
United States of America.

Resolution :—
Letters Commendatory.

- That, having regard to the conditions under which
intercommunion between Members of the Church
passing from one distant Diocese to another may be
duly maintained, we hereby deem it desirable—

(1) That forms of Letters Commendatory on
behalf of clergymen visiting other Dioceses be drawn
up and agreed upon, and that no strange clergyman
should officiate in any Diocese without exhibiting
such Commendatory Letters to the Bishop thereof ;

(2) That a form of Letters Commendatory for
such Laymen as may desire to avail themselves of
them be in like manner prepared.

The Benediction.

SECOND DAy.—Wednesday, September 25.
General Subject for the Day's Discussion,
COLONIAL CHURCHES.

Resolution :—
Subordination to Metropolitans.

That it be a matter for the consideration of this
Conference, and of the Bishops of the Colonial

Church especially—
(1) Whether it be desirable that such Colonial

and Missionary Dioceses as have not as yet been
gathered into Provinces be formed into any Province;

and
(2) Whether any, and if so what, steps should be

taken.

Programme for Conference of 1867. 59

Resolution :—

Discipline to be exercised by Metropolctans.

That, whereas schemes for conducting Ecclesias-
tical Affairs and for the exercising of Discipline
have been embodied in the Letters Patent granted
by the Crown to the Metropolitans of Canada, India,
Australasia, New Zealand, and South Africa, it
appears to us to be desirable that the aforesaid.
schemes so embodied in the Letters Patent be, for
the present, and until the local authorities, spiritual
and temporal, have otherwise provided, as much as.
possible adhered to; and that in all cases where the
power of coercive jurisdiction is not conveyed by
such Letters Patent it is desirable to provide by
voluntary agreement for the enforcement of discipline,
and that with a view to secure this end, all Bishops
at their Consecration, and clergymen of those
Dioceses at their ordination or institution to the cure
of souls, should be required to pledge themselves to
submit to the provisions of such schemes.

Resolution :—
Court of Metropolitans.

That in the case of any charges being preferred
against a Suffragan Bishop of any Province, it appears
to us desirable that the Metropolitan thereof should
summon all the Bishops of his Province to sit with
him for the hearing of the case, and that he should
not proceed to the hearing of it without the aid and
concurrence of all the Bishops of his Province that
can be assembled.

The question of any charge being brought against
a Metropolitan should also be considered.

Resolution :—
Question of Appeal.
That it be a matter for the consideration of this

Conference whether, in cases where no Letters
E.2

60 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Patent have been issued, any, and if any what,
Appeal should lie from such Provincial Decisions.

Resolution :— |
Conditions of Union.

That it be a matter for the consideration of this
‘Conference, in reference to Colonial Churches not
legally united to the United Churches of England
and Ireland, what safeguards as to their continued
soundness in Doctrine and Discipline be required by
the Mother Church as the condition of the main-
tenance of full spiritual and ecclesiastical communion.

The Benediction.

THIRD DAy.—Thursday, September 26th.
General Subject for the Day's Discusszon,

CO-OPERATION IN MISSIONARY ACTION.
Resolution :—

Notification of proposed Missionary Bishoprics.

That in case it should be proposed to found a
Missionary Bishopric by any of the branches of the |
Church represented in this Conference, it seems to
us desirable— |

(1) That notification of such intention be sent to
all Archbishops and Metropolitans of the Home and
Colonial Church of England and Ireland, the Primus
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Scotland, and
the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States ; and

(2) That, so soon as any person is consecrated to
such Bishopric, the announcement of such Conse-
cration be made to the same parties.

Sermon of the Bishop of 1 ροῖς. 61

Resolution :—
Subordination of Missionaries.

That, in the case of the establishment of any
Missionary Bishopric, and consecration of a Bishop
to the same, we deem it expedient that all Mission-
aries should place themselves under the general
superintendence of such Missionary Bishop, subject
always to their obedience to such written instructions
as may be sent to them by those in authority at
home.

Concluding resolution :—

That we desire to render our hearty thanks to
Almighty God for the blessings vouchsafed to us in
and by this Conference; and we desire to express
our hope that this our Meeting may hereafter be
followed by other Meetings to be conducted in the
spirit of the same brotherly love.

The Closing Benediction.

No. IV.

Sermon of Bishop Whitehouse, of Illinois, preached in
Lambeth Palace Chapel, on September 24, 1867.

“Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that
which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his
body’s sake, which is the Church.”—Co/. i. 24.

There is something very startling at the first glance
in the leading phraseology of this verse, and we chal-
lenge it with almost a suspicion that it cannot consist
with the humility of the man who chides himself as
“less than the least of all saints.”

62 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

“Fill up” what is behind of the sufferings of
Christ! “Fill up” the sufferings of the “Man of
sorrows!” “Fill up” the pains of poverty, exposure,
anxiety, betrayal, and agony which,—speaking in the
light of this world,—scarce left a sunny spot in the
life of Jesus! “Fill up” the sufferings of One who
drank drop by drop the mysterious cup of the Divine
wrath, while mind and body agonized in the terrible
struggle! “Fill up” the precious sufferings which
bought and healed a world !

This cannot be, and by every trait of the Apostle’s
character, as well as by the perfection and triumph of
the Cross, we are warned off from any such construc-
tion. Yet the words stand written for our learning.
There is a sense in which the spirit sealed them as
eternal truth, and like the other parts of the same
Testament they are living words for our hearts, con-
sciences, and lives.

What Paul did, and realized in his experience,
belongs, we may be assured, to the true spirit and
compass of our profession. The affection which
bound him thus to the Church and Christ must find
a responsive place in our hearts, as successors in his
calling of trust and sacrifice, which, though exercised
in the midst of less “ fiery trials” may still require us
to be “armed with the same suffering mind.” It
at least may show, in the deep-toned and mystical
relations it involves, what is the hereditary commission
of the Elect, and the burden on their generations of
discharging a long entail of “afflictions” for His
body’s sake, which is the Church. 3

I am placed to-day in one of the most trying, as
well as the most honourable, positions of, my life.
The delicate courtesy of His Grace of Canterbury
transferred the trust of the opening sermon to the
American Episcopate, and the friendship of our own
Presiding Bishop devolved it on me, because to some
extent I had been identified with this plan of demon-
strative unity, and had been adopted into the earlier

Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinots. 63

councils which determined and shaped it,—selected
thus by a courtesy, which did not stop to weigh
merit or estimate capacity, but regarded only the
antecedent of a remoter accident and privilege.

I know, brothers beloved, that I am standing in
the circle of my peers in the rank of ministration of
Christ’s Church, and that officially we are equal.
But I cannot keep down the consciousness to how
limited an extent that peerage applies to an equality
of learning, manhood, grace, experience, and power
in the “rhetoric of life,’ the lovely and profound
graces of your “holy conversation.” I cannot clear
myself from an inward rebuke that I should be
speaking as the father of Fathers, when I ought to sit
in silence, learning as “a child.’ Each impulse has
been checked, each thought has been crippled by the
haunting majesty of this strange secluded assembly,
and the vision of my own “ presence” so weak among
you.

But, while I have prayed and striven to “glory in
my infirmities” that the power of Christ may rest
upon me, I still cast myself upon a consciousness
that you have all learned through a life’s tears, no
matter how gifted you are, an experience taught by all
the huge discrepancy between the proud aggression
of the “young Melancthon,” daring for success, and
the subdued Apostle with the care of all the Churches.
What a sympathy we instinctively acquire with
words which breath of pity for sinfulness, and help
for labour, of a closer union with the unseen, of steps
guided on a great appointed course, of fellowship in
sufferings, begun in the holy flesh and holy soul of
our own Lord, and of the spirit of Grace, which is
continually teaching in discipline and soothing with
comfort, offering us sweet thorns that may be woven
into an angel’s crown, and transmuting each sancti-
fied care and struggle into a coronal, rayed with the
glory of Christ.

Hence then may I preach as communing with my

64 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

own tried and feeble nature, to chasten and cheer it ;
believing that we are more nearly one on the “hidden
man of the heart,” then we may be divided on your
eminence of scholarship or well-earned human
dignity. I trust more to touch the finer association
of your experience, than afford any instruction ; but
in our brotherhood with the great apostle, as “ keepers
of the flocks” we may meditatively appreciate his
divine words, and sympathize with his invigorating
experience.

Because Paul was made an apostle and minister,
“the afflictions” follow of necessity; they are
inherent of the office, as much as are the aggressive
duties and systematic labours. The enduring them
is fruit tothe Church which is Christ’s Body ; and
we cannot properly estimate a labour or affliction
without regarding both as the ὑστερήματα which, like
the “fragments” supernatural in the wilderness.
banquet of the five barley loaves and small fishes,
are gathered up by apostolic hands, each in his own.
basket, until the whole be fulfilled in the completed
elect. The apostle calls himself διάκονος, of the
Church, and for the Church, but where that Church
is ὀικονόμια θέου, a family to be administered, and a
trust involved of stewardship and implication, which,
even if unjustly handled, still involves relations of
personal profit.

But the ὑστερήματα mentioned are not the “ filling
up” of παθήματα, the passion and sufferings, for the
expiation of sin, of the Incarnate and Crucified, which
none could fill up and none can have, except in the
transferred experience of a crucified, buried, and risen
soul. Neither are they “sufferings” which malice
and violence even to martyrdom may wreak on the
flesh, and hurl on the quivering nerves.. But, they
are θλίψεις, afflictions of the inner nature and the
heart’s consciousness, which are not to be met in the
bravery of a stern endurance, which casts them off as
a very little thing, in the anasthesia of the flesh from

Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinots. 65.

the inward hope of glory. They are “afflictions”
which it were treachery not to feel, and loss not to
cherish ; where the inner man must be seared to the
right spiritual sensibility, if it does not respond to
them, not only in the pang of the sword, which goeth
through the heart, but in a quickened heart to casket
them in the tenderness, which saddens but elevates
the whole nature.

Christ and His ministry constitute one mystical
personality, and the identity runs through every
relation—as He is, so are they in this world. The
servant is not greater than his Lord, and separation
even to cruelty and hate, may be a natural sequence,
as we carry about in our body the mortification of
Christ, that His life may be manifested in us. But
far deeper is this, a community of liegemen and
servants sharing loyally in the struggle and attainder
of the Lord, for Christ says, I call you not servants
but friends, for the servant knoweth not what his
Lord doeth. It is the fellowship of the inner and
spiritual ; the co-operative in counsel and purpose,
the ancestral of an ever-returning feast with hereditary
dignity, and the noble responsibility of a heritage
faithfully transmitted in integrity and honour. It is

the consciousness inspiring every power, that while
' the leadership is resistless and the result triumph,
each individual effort exerted, and specially every
“affliction” garnered in the watchful breast in sym-
pathy with the Head, is graciously allowed as
contribution of individual partnership, accelerating
the issue and filling up the measure of the hours of
contest.

The sufferings of Christ are thus to be doubly taken
—those which He sustained in His own body, where
nothing remains to be fulfilled ; the other to be suffered
in His mystical Body to the end of the ages ;—and
so there remain many sufferings to be fulfilled. Of
this the Church as the appointed agency, the ministry
as the delegated headship, the members as the instru-

66 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

ments of work, must, severally and incorporate, carry
the burthen, as the Church represents Christ fulfilling,
both in receptiveness and activity, the work which the
Father gave Him todo. But the spirit in which the
“afflictions” are borne and the work done, is rejoicing,
the “joy in tribulation,” the winnowing of the elect.
Hence the filling up of what is behind of the afflic-
tions of Christ in “my flesh” has the two-fold
relation of sufferings of ours assumed by Christ, and
afflictions of His bequeathed to us in the grace of
reciprocal endurance.

The visible Church, “ the body of Christ,” instinct
with life, guidance, and sympathy from its visible
Head, is now witnessing in sackcloth. At every
point in the million million pores of sensibility, and
the deep capacity of a worn and anguished soul, the
“body” is fulfilling through its organism, the heir-
loom of the suffering state imparted by Him,—who
touched earth “to begin to do and to teach,” who
lived the “ Man of sorrows,” baptized His body into
His own baptism of blood, and left that Body to
work out, in its ages of discipline and mercy, the
mission begun over the hills and valleys of Palestine.

The three years of the Lord’s earthly manifestation
were type and pattern of all to follow. Had that
ministry continued for centuries ;.had those precious
feet trodden worn and bleeding all earth’s highways
and acres ; had that voice rung in its awful immen-
sity from heaven to hell, or pleaded with sweet
gentleness in the household ear, still would the
mysterious history have been the same,—afflictions,
rejection, crucifying afresh, and the few cross-bearers
following with holy chaunt the same pathway, and
gathering up the “fragments” of their Master’s
afflictions as a manna creation for earthly wants,
support for duty, memorial of tenderness, and earnest
of power, triumphant through weakness.

Such is and will be the position of the Church
which is Christ’s body in this world, which world in

Sermon of the Bishop of Illinors. 67

all its plans and policy, its heart and intellect, is
opposed to Christ ; such in some familiar or strange
forms will be the experience of the visible headship
of the undying Episcopate; such will be, in the
experience of the believer’s soul, the stigmata that
testify his fellowship in suffering, and the pulsations
of the infused current of the resurrection life.

The sufferings of the Redeemer, personal and
propitiatory, terminated on the cross. Heaven and
earth, time and eternity, took the indelible record,
“Tt ts finished.” But as He is one with the holy
cause of His truth and Church, given back in the
hour of universal dominion as Head over all things,
to be the living Head of His living Body, the
Church, the measure of suffering is wot fulfilled, the
lien of afflictions zo¢ discharged until the reproach,
persecution, and distress of the militant Church, and
the far sorer trials of her inner struggles have ended,
and her honoured faithful are the crowned conquerors
of the spotless church above. In the whole militant
Church, distributed through its offices and member-
ship, through its work and feeling ; under the blow
from without or the rending pang within ; in the
stern hour of fierceness, impotent to crush, or in the
ceaseless burthen of infirmity and sins ; in the com-
mon griefs, or the thorn betrayed only in the lone
cry of a thrice pressed anguish ; for you, for me, for
Christ’s ministers and Christ’s “little ones” are the
sufferings of Christ, one day to be “filled up,”
completed gloriously sealed.

St. Paul represents himself as affording his flesh,
—in its old nature, spiritually crucified, and, in its
power of labour and endurance, activity, and influence
freely consecrated,—to press on this consummation,
and hasten the coming hour of victory and peace.
Paul shrank neither from a suffering Messiah nor a
suffering Church, but, appreciating in both the highest
attributes of excellence and honour, cast body and
soul into the mould, to be used by Christ, as well as

68 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

to be “formed after the image of Him who created
him.” He rejoiced in his calling, magnified his.
office, glorified his Saviour for His work and His
love, discerned and cherished His mystical Body,
vindicated his apostleship with the might of his.
intellect and the heroism of his gigantic mission,.
irradiated Judaism and subdued the heathen, preached
far and wide the exhaustless Gospel, and then in
hallowed egoism threw open his own breast, that with
the blood of the sufferings—love warm and joy dyed,—
he might still feed his precious nestlings and nourish
children’s children. “I now rejoice in my sufferings.
for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflic-
tions of Christ in my flesh for His body’s sake,
which is the Church.”

And we, successors of his ministry and heirs of his.
faith, glorying in our calling and moaning apart,.
“Not worthy—not worthy to be called an apostle!”
we, when century has heaped on century the wrecks
of all human institutions, and buried them beneath
the dying verdure of fresh spring-times, only to be
crushed with more crumbling ruins, we who live when.
material progress scorns the past, when Mammon
builds Babel towers ; and science utters oracles from:
rocks and graves, to confuse the old faiths, and dis-
honour old trusts;—we stand in our unbroken line,
witness by the same sacramental altars of eighteen
centuries agone, confess in the same creeds, teach
from the same inspired word, recognize the mystical
spouse ever young and beautiful, and are folded to
her breast as a dear and holy mother ; we find per-
petuated in Christ’s visible body, each function of its
living organism, each susceptibility of its complex
being and individual experience, and encounter
“the dangers and chances of the world” inthe same
conflict with the same suffering Church. As we
catch this single gush of heart-revealing it is fresh for
us as a living spring to thirsty lip. We drink it in,
and then down among all our heart sickness and.

Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinors. 69

bewildered struggles, our wearying shame and spec-
cral responsibility, where perhaps years have withered
the flowers, and dried even perennial roots, there are
we conscious of response to joy in sufferings.

We rejoice in sympathy, because for us also, this
single verse is the experience of the believing soul,
because it explains our place in this world, because
it opens our sufficient consolation and because it
defines our honourable trust.

How much of our understanding and enjoyment
of Gospel righteousness depends on the proper view
of our real oneness with Christ. When we know
Him, not alone “after the flesh” asa being of singu-
lar and isolated excellence, of noble character, sweet
benevolence and lofty power, as the great Teacher to
a band of disciples, the bright example of purity and
love, standing off from us to be studied, imitated,
honoured, and adored—but, when we know Him in
the spirit as united to us, our wisdom, our righteous-
ness, our sanctification, our redemption, acting for us
and acting in us, and our spiritual nature entering into
the same condition as that of our great representative,
as it is written “If any man be in Christ he is a new
creature,’—then indeed, the travail and the victory
of Christ are his. He is the son of God and heir of
the kingdom; he has become the beloved child in
whom the Father is well pleased. He has eternal
life abiding in him; he has come unto Mount Sion
and the new Jerusalem, and the brotherhood of the
living dead ; his enemies are overcome, and he is the
conqueror of death and hell; his portion is to be
where Christ is, and his progress, even now is “ from
glory to glory ;” already he is exercising his priest-
hood and his kingship, he reigns with Christ.

It doth not indeed yet “appear” what we shall be.
Much of this germing glory is and will be hidden.
The new creatures carry to outward observation the
soiled and beggar dress of the hedge and the wilder-
ness. To man they look even as others who have no

70 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

such hope, and even to themselves they seem only
weak, unfaithful and chief of sinners. It doth not
appear to us, but it does appear to the Father, the
Lamb and the Spirit. They regard the true Christian
as thus transformed into Christ’s image, clothed with
Christ’s righteousness, united to Him in the reciprocal
crucifixion and the new life of the resurrection, dead
in Christ, in Him quickened, justified, and raised, the
new and heavenly being called into life within ; with
a struggling but conquering holiness pressing him
towards the mark for the prize of the high calling.
In proportion as he sees and feels this precious.
mystical and spiritual union, will the believer learn
to rejoice with “ joy unspeakable and full of glory.”
It explains our place in the world in its perpetual
separation and inevitable antagonism. Oh! awful
vastness and penetrative subtilty of the world! We
are not marshalled sharp and defiant as hostile
armies, flaunting their standards, serried in rank and
battle cry. But the world is all around us, the
enveloping medium, and with elemental forces,—the
world around the Church, the world w#thin the
Church, and the world in each heart of struggle and
grace. But no matter where, no matter in what
form ; no matter how bold in cruelty, how seductive
in blandishment, how tangled in interest, and blended
in counsels, how co-operative in social advances, and
mutually dependent in the instruments, still the
enmity of the world is deep and permanent, according
to that significant saying of the Saviour,—the world
hated Me before it hated you. Hence our age and
condition will be necessarily a period of multiplied
and distributed “afflictions,” minutely ramified and
keenly penetrative, boundless in area as exhaustless
in ingenuity. The Church is alive and the world is
alive. Each grapples the other or permeates the
other as the case may be, on contact at myriad
points, with forces and influences, silent as the dew,
and leaping as the cloud-flash; internal as_ the

Sermon of the Bishop of [llinots. 71

blood current and sensitive as the nerves; wise as the
serpent and grand in intellect and research ; tender as
the dove and fascinating as household loves. This
is our heritage for “ afflictions,” this is our treasure-
house for rejoicing in sufferings.

The mummy may lie in the sarcophagus, and the
sick cripple lie still on the couch, but the active, the
vigorous, the busy want space and motion, conflict
and antagonism. They will race hither and thither
to be filled. This is our “hour” and in such an age
“ numbers numberless ” will be the afflictions of Christ.

Not ours the time, when the light through the
casement or the “songin the night” of solitary faith
betrayed the watcher of the Church in the wilderness
of heathenism or corruption ; nor ours the fellowship
in suffering, doing and bearing for the truth, as we
would in the dungeon, at the stake, in the amphi-
theatre or in the disciplinary solitude of the cave on
the mountain. Ours is the superb energy of revival,
when the Church God inspired, challenges, wrestles,
and works; when the Church claims her inheritance,
and vows to retrieve it ; when she moves aggressively
as a recognised power, rallies her men, women and
children for work through society, on the summits of
refinement, in the places of learning, in the throng of
cities down to their gloomiest dens, over the fields and
hamlets, in mines and factories, following enterprise
to the distant colony and reclaiming the waste; when
she cheers with prayers the wayfarer of the cross
into heathenism refined or brutal, and enlarges the
heart so long exiled from the brotherhood of
Christendom with plans and pleadings for restoring
unity. This is an age of vigour, materialism, science,
and breadth ; this is an age of thrift, refinement, and
liberty, which quickens the individual to intense
development and drives the mass with impassioned
tread ;—can we wonder that we of the Anglican
Communion have the yearnings, the griefs, the temp-
tations, the betrayals, the false purposes and mis-

72 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

guided minds, the inadequate resources, all the
indescribable conflicts which darken our atmosphere ?
Can we deny how much we deserve the rebuke,
ridicule, and correction of the sharp world around us?
Can we hush our sobs when we know in our poor
experience how Christ is wounded in the house of
His friends? Can we cheer ourselves in selfish
gladness, when there is so much to be done, so much
to be endured, and the strife seems so unequal with
our shepherd sling? No, brothers, no; we bless God
in our heart of hearts that He has poured around
light and heat, even if it does quicken spawn of evil,
if it does shame us in its brightness, and make us
faint in its glow; you wish no change in the strife
that tends not to victory, no higher honour than to
gather the fragments of the sufferings of Jesus, no
more sufficient consolation than the pledge which
covers all infirmities and reaches our heart sins.
“My grace is sufficient for thee.” This is for us
“Qur song in the night,” the force of the day’s work,
a consciousness within not to be uttered ;—“I xow
rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that
which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh
for his body’s sake which is the Church.”

And these words open our sufficient consolation.
As Downe quaintly says, “The joy of that text is
germinal and ariseth out of the bosom and womb of
the sorrow itself. It is not that I rejoice because I
am afflicted ; it is not because I shall sink in my
calamity and be buried in that valley, but because
my calamity raises me, and makes my valley a hill
bringing me nearer to God.” Even so! St. Paul said,
“T now rejoice in my sufferings for you.’ Not that
suffering ceased to be such, and physically his nerve
did not quiver with pain or his heart sink in much
weariness. ‘The “perils often” were noted and felt.
The “care of all the Churches” pressed sore on an
aching brow, and the “thorn in the flesh ” pierced
with its hidden point the heart of hearts. Yet wel-

Sermon of the Bishop of Illinois. 73

come all! The union with Christ in all these things
changed them into seeds of light, earnests of peace,
and the noble martyr-soul could glow and nerve
itself with the honourable mission and anticipated
victory.

Such is our earthly trial when sanctified, such our
labour and discipline and afflictions as ministers of
Christ. Received in faith, sustained in hope, handled
with disciplinary and bracing power, they make us
better and meet for rest. We are assured that our
Saviour sees thern, that we and ours are known and
regarded, that succour and recompense are alike
included, and so may we bear and do, “to fill up
these afflictions of Christ in our flesh,” for Christ’s
afflictions end in glory.

Thus is defined our honourable trust, and this
union to Christ, the membership with His body, the
Church, and our peculiar calling of apostleship
culminate in our obligations to others. St. Paul’s
_whole estimate of human nature was changed by
these relations to the covenant salvation. Hence-
forth we hear him say, “I know no man after the
flesh.” Once he had loved or rejected qualities
inherent in the individual,and,on principles of his own
taste or wisdom, he had admired the properties most
honourable and useful to society, and within the
restricted sphere of national prejudice and associa-
tion. But this was changed. ΑἹ] men and each indi-
vidual were now estimated as they were related to
Christ. In the good he saw the Saviour’s righteous-
ness and honour ; in the ignorant and impenitent, he
saw only that they were “afar off,’ and alienated
from Christ by wicked works. The whole moral
creation was to him not as written in the flesh but
in the spirit. Hence the joy was 22: suffering, not in
the midst of it. It was for others, not for himself.
It was in his flesh, not in spirit and disposition, but
actually endured in the flesh. It was not for his own
salvation but for edifying the Church, and ‘shat

74 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Christ’s visible body. He might have escaped it, if
he would have been satisfied to have had his faith, in
this sense to himself, before God, but he could not;
he read himself, “ debtor to the Greek and barbarian,
the bond and free,” and, specially, his “ kinsmen after
the flesh,’ and through much tribulation he must
press to fulfil it. Hence the diffusive love of the
commissioned heart. All qualities are worthless, if
debased by unrepented sin, all distinctions nothing,
if they stand on the dead level of impenitence or un-
belief. All sorrows are small in comparison with
eternal danger, and the present degradation of “ the
wrath of God abiding.” All relief is but superficial,
which knows only the flesh, and weeps only from
eyes which have been dimmed with no genuine tears
_ of a faithful repentance. To know ourselves we must
know Christ. To appreciate human nature in its
realities for good and its fearful exposures to evil,
we must enter into the same mind that was in Christ
Jesus. To minister to what is useful, kind and loving,
in our place of activity we must know men, not after
the flesh, but in the worth and woe so awfully re-
vealed and contrasted in the “sufferings of Christ.”
A living union to Him, to which we are invited, drawn
and changed by a tenderness which passeth concep-
tion, is the fountain head of just relations to the
world in its struggle and to our fellow-men in their
claims. No one goes out over their length and
breadth with such success and power, as the one who
has attained experience of that happy, thrice happy
state of soul, to love and forget himself in the Saviour,
to live and act as Christ is, all and in all, and him-
self a member of the great body, through which the
life is sent and perpetuated, by the ever-present Re-
deemer, in the oneness of work, suffering, and joy.
And‘no bishop will grapple resolutely with a course
of godly work, or adventure honestly in sacrifice of
charity, or plead a heart message, or gently admonish
in discipline, or even move on an earnest track of

Sermon of the Bishop of Lllinors. 75

functional duty, without finding,in and under all,
sufferings, which, rightly interpreted, are the “ afflic-
tions of Christ,’ and “implement” of the appointed
measure of His suffering body.

In relations which I have thus so feebly sketched,
does the apostolic brotherhood of to-day gather under
the roof which, for six centuries, has been the abode
in wealth and power of the highest ecclesiastical
dignity ;. where the mitred brows have ached with
burthens grave enough to find large place in history,
and hearts have wrestled in grief and pang written
only in the Book of God. We meet in the solemn
chapel, whence from Boniface onwards the same old
line has defiled to the other high places of the church ;
and from which have deployed over the broad Atlantic
the four score who have verified in a new world the
experience of the apostle, and the colonial band which
is girdling the earth. Could the solemn possession
of that Episcopate, from the place of the departed,
utter their testimony, sure I am, it would be in accord
with the Prisoner in Rome, and whenever work was
true and spirit loyal, deep would answer to deep—
“ Filling up the afflictions of Christ ”»—“ Rejoicing in
sufferings.”

And meet it was that the first appeal for a conclave
of the likeminded Brotherhood should spring from a
sense of anxiety, hazard, and bewildered responsi-
bility. _Canada asked in weakness—God answered
in strength. From the undefined and _ scattered
afflictions, He summoned the joy of a grand demon-
strative Unity. He collected the ὑστερήματα, “ frag-
ments,’—so that the might and majesty of the super-
natural creation might be disclosed,and the abundance
be carried back on the homeward way for fresh hun-
ger, and expanded multitudes. We have come from
afar to this Conference in humility and weakness,
bearing our personal and corporate griefs, and anxious
to find in spiritual fellowship what by God’s grace
may inform and strengthen us. But we have also

F 2

76 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

come to demonstrate for ever a fact, existent indeed,
but one never before exhibited or made foederal in
energy—the Co-operative Unity of the Anglican
Communion.

And, if we are permitted to secure the effect of the
first of these to the extent only, that, as we each have
need, our inner nature may go home refreshed in
holiness and peace, and our working power be in-
creased in confidence and extent, by the larger obser-
vation and more assured fraternity ;—and if we
should fulfil the other to the issue, that in equal and
loving reality we had sealed together the Holy Sacra-
ment the visible unity of the Anglo-Catholic Church,
then—however in our consciousness we might be
disappointed of larger results, or the world might
cry, “what meaneth this waste,” or the Church might
chide that we had not borne home more fruits for
token,—still thoughtfully and in reverence, patiently
waiting God’s time for His uses, manifold of this
energized and visible potency, might we magnify
Him for His goodness, that had made us partakers "
in mission thus honoured and blest.

But whether such an assembly speak trumpet-
tongued from the high atmosphere of foederated
liberty, or in tones chastened and restricted by con-
sciousness of personal and national prescription, there
will be experience of sorrow, rebuke without and
misgiving within. In whatever we may do or say,
or withhold in humble fervency of love and zeal, with
soul intent on the welfare and woe of Christ’s Mystical
Body, in recognized oneness with Him, in the “ fear
and trembling” of a rejoicing heart, must there bea
mingling of suffering “the filling up of the afflictions
of Christ.” But “such grief is the mother of joy,”
and Bernard says, “as the cells of the honeycomb
wall in the honey, and the shell preserveth the kernel,
so that joy collected and multiplied by the grace of
our Lord, is prepared and preserved for the joys of
Paradise.”

Archbishops Opening Address, 1867. 77

No. V. (See page 14.)

Opening Address delivered by the Archbishop of Can-
terbury in the first Session of the first Lambeth
Conference, September 24, 1867.

My Most REVEREND AND RIGHT REVEREND
BRETHREN,

In opening the proceedings of the first Conference
that has ever taken place of the Bishops of the
Reformed Church in visible communion with the
United Church of England and Ireland, my prevail-
ing feeling is one of profound gratitude to our
Heavenly Father for having thus far prospered the
efforts which have been made to promote this solemn
assembling of ourselves together. Many have been
the anxious thoughts and great the heart-searchings
which have attended the preparations for this remark-
able manifestation of life and energy in the several
branches of our communion. Many also have been
the prayers, and fervent, I trust, will continue to be
the prayers, offered up by us, severally and collec-
tively, that He will prosper our deliberations, to the
advancement of His glory and the good of His
Church. Having met together, as I truly believe
we have done, in a spirit of love to Christ, and to
all those who love Him, with an earnest desire to
strengthen the bonds which unite the several
branches of our Reformed Church, to encourage
each other in our endeavours to maintain the faith
once delivered to the saints, and to advance the

78 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

kingdom of Christ upon earth, I will not doubt that
a blessing from above will rest upon our labours, and
that the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whose aid we
have invoked, will direct, sanctify, and govern our
counsels.

The origin of this Conference has already been
stated in the circular of invitation which I addressed
to you all. It was at the instance of the Metropoli-
tan and the Bishops of the Church of Canada, sup-
ported by the unanimous request of a very large
meeting of Archbishops and Bishops of the Home
and Colonial Church—a request confirmed by ad-
dresses from both the Houses of Convocation of my
Province of Canterbury—that I resolved upon con-
vening it. Further encouragement to venture upon
this unprecedented step was afforded when the peti-
tion from the Canadian Church was first discussed, a
plain intimation being given by a distinguished
member of the Protestant Episcopal Church in: the
United States of America, that it would be regarded
as a very graceful act, and would be hailed with
general satisfaction in that Church, if the invitation
to the Conference were extended to our Episcopalian
brethren in those States.

Fully conscious, however, of all the difficulties
which must surround the attempt to organise and
superintend an assembly of so novel a character, I
might well have hesitated to incur so great a risk ;
but to have refused to yield to wishes thus fully and
forcibly expressed, to have shrunk from undertaking
the consequent responsibility; would have been un-
worthy of the position in which, by God’s providence,
I am placed. In faith and prayer has the task been
undertaken, and I humbly trust it will please God to
prosper our work to a successful conclusion. The
result, indeed, has thus far more than justified the
expectations raised. We rejoice to find that so
many of our brethren from distant parts of the
globe have been moved to respond to the call, and

Archbishop's Opening Address, 1867. 79

we welcome with feelings of cordial affection and
genuine sympathy the presence of so large a pro-
portion of the American Episcopate. From very
many also, who, owing to various circumstances,
have been prevented from joining us, I have received
letters. expressing the profound satisfaction and
thankfulness with which they regard the opportuni-
ties afforded by this gathering for conferring to-
gether upon topics of mutual interest ; for discussing
the peculiar difficulties and perplexities in which our
widely-scattered Colonial Churches are involved, and
the evils to which they are exposed ; for cementing
yet more firmly the bonds of Christian communion
between Churches acknowledging one Lord, one
faith, one baptism—connected not only by the ties
of kindred, but by common formularies; ‘and for
meeting, through their representatives, from the
most distant regions of the earth, to offer up united
prayers and praise to the Most High in the mother
tongue common to us all, and to partake together
of the Holy Communion of the Body and Blood of
our Saviour Christ.

It has never been contemplated that we should
assume. the functions of a General Synod of all the
Churches in full communion with the Church of
England, and take upon ourselves to enact canons
that should be binding upon those here represented.
We merely propose to discuss matters of practical
interest, and pronounce what we deem expedient
in resolutions which may serve as safe guides to
future action. Thus it will be seen that our first
essay is rather tentative and experimental, in a
matter in which we have no distinct precedent to
direct us.

The subjects which will be brought under your
consideration have already been laid before you in
the Prospectus of Arrangements for our proceedings.
They may be briefly comprised under the following
heads :—(1) The best way of promoting the Re-

80 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

union of Christendom. (2) The Notification of the
Establishment of New Sees. (3) Letters commen-
datory from Clergymen and Laymen passing to
distant Dioceses. (4) Subordination in our Colonial
Church to Metropolitans. (5) Discipline to be exer-
cised by Metropolitans. (6) Court of the Metro-
politan. (7) Question of Appeal. (8) Conditions of
Union with the Church at home. (9) Notification
of proposed Missionary Bishoprics. (10) Subordina-
tion of Missionaries. In the selection of topics
regard has been chiefly had to those which bear on
practical difficulties seeming to require solution. It
has been found impossible to meet all views, and
embrace every recommendation that has been sug-
gested. Some may be of opinion that subjects have
been omitted which ought to have found a place
in our deliberations; that we should have been
assembled with the view of defining the limits of
Theological Truth; but it has been deemed far
better, on the first occasion of our meeting in such
form, rather to do too little than attempt too much,
and instead of dealing with propositions which can
lead to no efficient result, to confine ourselves to
matters admitting of a practical and beneficial
solution.

The unexpected position in which our Colonial
Churches have recently found themselves placed has
naturally created a great feeling of uneasiness in the
minds of many. I am _ fully persuaded that the
idea of any essential separation from the Mother
Church is universally repudiated by them; they all
cling to her with the strongest filial affection, while
they are bound to her Doctrines and Form of
Worship by cogent motives of interest. At the
same time I have good reason to believe that there
are various shades of opinion as to the best modes
in which the connection between the daughter
Churches and their common mother can be main-
tained ; and I trust that the interchange of thought

Archbishop's Opening Address, 1867. Sr.

between those who are chiefly interested in those
important questions will lead to some profitable
conclusions. I may also state my belief that legis-
lation on the subject of the Colonial Churches has
been postponed until the view taken by this Con-
ference shall have been declared. These matters
have been regarded under various aspects in the
voluminous correspondence which I have had with
many of my Colonial brethren; they will all, no
doubt, be fully developed in the course of our dis-
cussion by those who represent these several
opinions. I trust that, under a deep sense of the
solemnity of the occasion on which we are
assembled, our discussions will be characterised by
mutual forbearance, if sentiments at variance with
our own shall be advanced, so that by the com-
parison, rather than the conflict of opinions, we may
be drawn nearer to each other in brotherly harmony
and concord. With the arrangement that certain
subjects shall, after a brief consideration, be referred
to Committees, I believe that the various topics for
consideration may be profitably discussed.

Doubtless there is much in these latter days, even
as we have all been taught to expect, which is dark
and dispiriting to the mind that has not been exer-
cised to discern the meaning of such signs. The
enemy is on every side, plying his insidious arts to
sap the foundations of belief, to hinder the cause of
God’s Church, and prevent the Word of God from
doing its work in the conversion of the soul of
sinful man. No effort is spared to disparage the
authority of those who witness for the truth and
uphold the dogmatic teaching for which the Apos-
tolic writings are at once the model and the warrant.
Though it be not our purpose to enter upon theo-
logical discussion, yet our very presence here is a
witness to our resolution to maintain the faith,
which we hold in common as our priceless heritage,
set forth in our Liturgy and other formularies ; and

82 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

this our united celebration of offices common to our
respective Churches in each quarter of the globe, is
a claim, in the face of the world, for the inde-
pendence of separate Churches, as well as a protest
against the assumption by any Bishop of the Church
Catholic of dominion over his fellows in the Episco-
pate.

Not one of us, I am persuaded, can fail to respond
to that earnest desire for unity which is. expressed
in the introduction to our resolutions. It is but the
echo of the petition which the Saviour of the world
offered in behalf of His Church when He prayed
the Father that those who should believe in Him
might all be one in the Father and the Son. And
while we deplore the divided state of Christendom,
and mourn over the obstacles which at present exist
to our all being joined together in the unity of the
Spirit and in the bond of peace, this very feeling
should be our most powerful motive to urge our
petitions at the Throne of Grace, that it may please
God, in His own good time, to remove such hin-
drances as at present render that union impracti-
cable.

And now may our Almighty Father shed abroad
upon us the spirit of wisdom, peace, and love; and
inspire us with such counsels as may most tend to
edification ; so that, being knit together more closely
in the bonds of brotherly affection and Christian
communion, and animated with a more fervent zeal
for the Saviour’s honour and the salvation of souls,
we may do our endeavour to prepare His Church
for the coming of Him whom. we lovingly adore,
and whose advent in power and glory we ardently
look to and long for.

Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 83

No. VI. (See page 16.)
Amended Programme adopted during the Sesstons.
SECOND Day.—Wednesday, September 25.
General Subject for the Day's Discussion,

COLONIAL CHURCHES.

Resolution I. :—
Alteration of Order.

That His Grace the President of this meeting be
requested to allow the last Resolution headed
“ Conditions of Union,’ to be first taken into consi-
deration.

Resolution ITI. :—
Conditions of Union.

(2) That in the opinion of this Conference,
“Unity in the Faith,’ and fellowship in the one
Body of Christ, will be best maintained among the
several branches of the Anglican Communion in the
manner already pointed out by the Convocation of
the Province of Canterbury: viz., by the due and
Canonical subordination of the Synods of the several
_ Branches to the higher authority of the Synods above
them, the Diocesan Synod being recognised as inferior
to the Provincial Synod, and the Provincial Synod to
some higher Synod or Synods of the Anglican
Communion.

84 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Appointment of Committee.

(ὁ) That a Committee of members (with
power to add to their number, and to obtain the
assistance of men learned in Ecclesiastical and Canon
Law) be appointed to inquire into and report upon
the whole subject ; and that such report be forwarded
to His Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury,
with a request that, if possible, it may be communi-
cated to any adjourned meeting of this Conference.

Proposed Inquiry into Disunion in Natal.

(c) That in the judgment of the Bishops now
assembled, the whole Anglican Communion is deeply
injured by the present condition of the Church in
Natal ; and that a Committee be now appointed at
this General Meeting to consider the whole case, and
inquire into all the proceedings which have been
taken therein; and to report on the best mode by
which the Church may be delivered from the con-
tinuance of this scandal, and the true faith main-
tained. That such Report be forwarded to his Grace
the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request
that, if possible, it may be communicated to any
adjourned meeting of the Conference ; and

Further, that his Grace be requested to transmit
the same to all the Bishops! of the Anglican Com-
munion, and to ask for their judgment thereupon.

Resolution III. :-—

Question of Appeal.

That in the opinion of this Conference, it is very
desirable that there should be a Board of Reference,

’ ? Convocations, Conventions, and Synods.

Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 85

ora Spiritual Tribunal for final appeal and decision
in all matters of Faith; including Representatives
from all Branches of the Anglo-Catholic Church ;
and the Bishops here assembled earnestly recommend
this most important matter to the deliberate con-
sideration of the Convocations, Conventions, and
Synods of the said Anglo-Catholic Church.

Or, tf Resolution III. should not be carried, then—
Question of Appeal.

III. That in order to the maintenance of the
strictest union between the Mother-Church of Eng-
land and her daughter Churches in the Colonies, it is
desirable that in questions of doctrine there should
be an appeal from the tribunals for the exercise of
Discipline in each Province to a spiritual tribunal in
England.

That such tribunal be presided over by the Primate
of all England (for the time being), and be composed
of Bishops only.

Appointment of Committee.
And—

That a Committee be appointed to consider the
details of the Constitution of such tribunal, and that
their Report be forwarded to His Grace the Lord
Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request that, if
possible, it may be communicated to any adjourned
meeting of the Conference.

Circulation of Report.

And further, that his Grace be requested to trans-
mit the same to the Convocations and Synods of all
the Provinces of the United Church of England and
Ireland, and to all Bishops (if any) of the said
Church not included in any Ecclesiastical Province.

86 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Election of Members of Tribunal.

That His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury be
requested to invite the several Provinces of the
Church to elect Bishops for the said Tribunal.

Resolution IV. :—
This Meeting to be followed by other Meetings.

That, in order to give effect to the above Resolu-
tions, it is desirable that a General Synod of the
Bishops of the Anglican Communion, accompanied,
if it be thought fit, by other representatives from each
Diocese, should be assembled from time to time
under the Presidency of the Primate of all England.

Resolution V. :—
Time of First Meeting, &c.

That His Grace the Lord Archbishop is hereby
requested to summon the First Meeting of such
Synod for the year 187. ; and that in the opinion of
this Conference the Primate of all England should
be authorised to summon any Special Synod within
that time, should the needs of the Church seem to
require it; or should his Grace be requested to do
so by or more Bishops.

Resolution VI. :—
Conditions of Union.

That, in order to the binding of the Churches of our
Colonial Empire and the Missionary Churches beyond
them in the closest union with the Mother-Church, it
is necessary that they receive and maintain without
alteration the standards of Faith and Doctrine, as they
are in use in that Church. That nevertheless each

Amended Programme, Sept. 25, 1867. 87

Province should have the right to make such adapta-
tions and additions to the services of the Church as its
peculiar circumstances may require.

Provided, That no change or addition be made
inconsistent with the spirit and principles of the Book
of Common Prayer, and that all such changes be
liable to revision by any Synod of the Anglican
Communion in which the said Province shall be
represented.

Resolution VII. :—
Court of Metropolitans.

That in case of charges being brought against a
Suffragan Bishop of any Province it appears to be.
desirable that the Metropolitan thereof should
summon all the Bishops of his Province to sit with
him for the hearing of the case, and that he should
not proceed to the hearing of it without the aid of all
the Bishops of the Province that can. be assembled,
who shall sit with him as judges.

That the question of any charge brought against a
Metropolitan be referred to the Committee appointed
by Resolution ITI.

Resolution VIII. :—

Scheme for conducting Election of Bishops, when not
otherwise provided for. ;

That it is the opinion of this Conference that the
election of a Bishop of any Colonial Diocese should
be made by the Synod of the Diocese convened for
that purpose, with liberty to delegate this power to
others. But that no such election should be deemed
canonically valid until it shall have been confirmed
by the Bishops of the Province.

That the rules for the regulation of such elections
be made by the Synods of the several Provinces.

88 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Resolution IX. :—

Declaration of Submission to Regulations of Synods.

That all Bishops at their Consecration should be
required to make a written Declaration of adhesion
and submission to the regulations agreed upon by the
General Synod of the Anglican Communion ; and
that a form of such Declaration be prepared by the
Committee appointed by Resolution III.

No. VII. (See page 17.)

Formal “Address to the Faithful” from the Bishops
attending the Conference of 1867.

To the Faithful in Christ Jesus, the Priests and
Deacons, and the Lay Members of the Church
of Christ in Communion with the Anglican
Branch of the Church Catholic,—

We the undersigned Bishops, gathered under the
good providence of God for prayer and conference
at Lambeth, pray for you that ye may obtain grace,
mercy, and peace from God our Father, and from
the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

We give thanks to God, brethren beloved, for the
faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love towards
the saints, which hath abounded amongst you; and
for the knowlege of Christ which through you hath
been spread abroad amongst the most vigorous races
of the earth; and with one mouth we make our
supplications to God, even the Father, that by the
power of the Holy Ghost He would strengthen us
with His might, to amend amongst us the things

“Address to the Faithful,’ 1867. 89

which are amiss, to supply the things which are
lacking, and to reach forth unto higher measures of
love and zeal in worshipping Him, and in making
known His name; and we pray that in His good
time He would give back unto His whole Church
the Blessed gift of Unity in Truth.

And now. we exhort you in love that ye keep
whole and undefiled the faith once delivered to the
saints, as ye have received it of the Lord Jesus.
We entreat you to watch and pray, and to strive
heartily with us against the frauds and subtleties
wherewith the faith hath been aforetime and is now
assailed.

We beseech you to hold fast, as the sure word
of God, all the canonical Scriptures of the Old and
New Testament; and that by diligent study of
these oracles of God, praying in the Holy Ghost,
ye seek to know more of the Lord Jesus Christ our
Saviour, very God and very Man, ever to be adored
and worshipped, whom they reveal unto us, and of
the will of God, which they declare.

Furthermore, we entreat you to guard yourselves
and yours against the growing superstitions and
additions with which in these latter days the truth
of God hath been overlaid; as otherwise, so espe-
cially by the pretension to universal sovereignty over
God’s heritage asserted for the See of Rome, and by
the practical exaltation of the Blessed Virgin Mary
as mediator in the place of her Divine Son, and by
the addressing of prayers to her as intercessor be-
tween God and man. Of such beware, we beseech
you, knowing that the jealous God giveth not His
honour to another.

Build yourselves up, therefore, beloved, in your
most holy faith; grow in grace and in the know-
ledge and love of Jesus Christ our Lord. Show
forth before all men by your faith, self-denial, purity,
and godly conversation, as well as by your labours
for the people amongst whom God hath so widely

90 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

spread you, and by the setting forth of His Gospel
to the unbelievers and the heathen, that ye are
indeed the servants of Him who died for us to
reconcile His Father to us, and to bea sacrifice for
the sins of the whole world.

Brethren beloved, with one voice we warn you:
the time is short; the Lord cometh; watch and
be sober. Abide steadfast in the Communion of
Saints, wherein God hath granted you a place. Seek
in faith for oneness with Christ in the blessed Sacra-
ment of His body and blood. Hold fast the Creeds
and the pure worship and order, which of God’s
grace ye have inherited from the Primitive Church.
Beware of causing divisions contrary to the doctrine
ye have received. Pray and seek for unity amongst
yourselves, and amongst all the faithful in Christ
Jesus; and the good Lord make you perfect, and
keep your bodies, souls, and spirits, until the coming
of the Lord Jesus Christ.

(Szgned)
C. T. Cantuar. Thomas B. Morrell, Coadjutor
M. G. Armagh. Bishop of Edinburgh.
R. C. Dublin
A. C. London. F. Montreal, Metropolitan of
C. R. Winton. Canada.
C. St. David’s G. A. New Zealand, Metro-
J. Lichfield. politan of New Zealand.
S. Oxon. R. Capetown, Metropolitan of
Thomas Vowler, St. Asaph. South Africa.
A. Llandaff. Aubrey G. Jamaica.
John Lincoln. T. Barbados.
W. K. Sarum. J. Bombay.
John T. Norwich. H. Nova Scotia.
J. C. Bangor. Εις T. Labuan.
H. Worcester. H. Grahamstown. .

Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., H. J. C. Christchurch.
Bishop of St. Andrew’s, Dun- Mathew Perth.

keld, and Dumblane. Benj. Huron.
Thos. G. Suther, Bishop of W. W. Antigua.
Aberdeen and Orkney. E. H. Sierra Leone.

William S. Wilson, Bishop of T. N. Honolulu.
Glasgow and Galloway. J. T. Ontario.

“Address to the Faithful,’ 1867.

J. W. Quebec.

W. J. Gibraltar.

H. L. Dunedin.

Edward, Bishop Orange River
Free State.

A. N. Niagara.

William George Tozer, Mis-
sionary Bishop.

James B. Kelly, Coadjutor of
Newfoundland.

S. Angl. Hierosol.

John H. Hopkins, Presiding
Bishop of Pr. Ep. Church,
in the United States.

Chas. P. McIlvaine, Bishop of
Ohio.

α. J. Gloucester and Bristol.

E. H. Ely.

William Chester.

T. L. Rochester.

Horace Sodor and Man.

Samuel Meath.

H. Kilmore.

Charles Limerick Ardfert and
Aghadoe.

Robert Eden, D.D., Bishop of
Moray, Ross, and Caithness,
Primus.

Alexander Ewing, Bishop of
Argyll and the Isles.

Manton Eastburn, Bishop of
Massachusetts.

J. Payne, Bishop of Cape
Palmas and parts adjacent.
H. J. Whitehouse, Bishop of

Illinois.

Thomas Atkinson, Bishop of
North Carolina.

Henry W. Lee,
Iowa.

Horatio Potter, Bishop of New
York.

Thomas M. Clark, Bishop of
Rhode Island.

Alexander Gregg, Bishop of
Texas.

W. H. Odenheimer, Bishop of
New Jersey.

G. T. Bedell, Assistant Bishop
of Ohio.

Henry C. Lay, Missionary
Bishop of Arkansas and the
Indian Territory.

Jos. C. Talbot, Assistant Bishop
of Indiana.

Richard H. Wilmer, Bishop of
Alabama.

Charles Todd Quintard, Bishop
of Tennessee.

John B. Kerfoot, Bishop of
Pittsburgh.

J. P. B. Wilmer, Bishop of
Louisiana.

C. M. Williams, Missionary
Bishop to China.

Bishop of

J. Chapman, Bishop.

George Smith, late Bishop of
Victoria (China).

David Anderson, late Bishop
of Rupert’s Land.

Edmund Hobhouse, Bishep of
New Zealand.

92 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

No. VIII. (See page 32.)
LATIN AND GREEK VERSIONS OF THE ADDRESS.

Archdeacon Wordsworth, afterwards Bishop of
Lincoln, translated the Episcopal Address into Latin
and Greek, as follows :—

EPISTOLA ENCYCLICA.

EPISCOPORUM IN ANGLIA CONGREGATORUM DIEBUS
XXIV.-XXVII. MENSIS SEPTEMBRIS, ANNO SALUTIS
MDCCCLXVII.

Fidelibus in Christo Jesu, Presbyteris, Diaconts, et
Laicis, cum Anglicand parte Ecclesie Catholice
communicantibus, salutem inDomin

Nos, qui subscripsimus, Episcopi, benigna Dei
providentid communium orationum et consiliorum
causa unanimiter consociati, in Palatio Archiepiscopi
Cantuariensis Lambethano, obsecrationes pro vobis
facimus, ut gratiam, misericordiam et pacem con-
sequamini a Deo Patre Nostro, et a Nostro Salvatore
Domino Jesu Christo.

Gratias Deo agimus, fratres carissimi, propter fidem
in Domino Jesu Christo, et in sanctos dilectionem,
quz abundavit in vobis; et propter Christi agnitionem,
quz per vos inter valentissimas orbis universi nationes
dimanavit ; et uno ore supplicationes offerimus Deo
et Patri, ut potentia Spiritts Sancti virtute Sua nos
confortet, ut, que sint apud nos depravata, emendare,
et, que desint, supplere valeamus; et ut nosmet ipsos
ad sublimiores dilectionis et zeli mensuras erigamus
in Illo adorando, et in Nomine Ejus declarando ;
et enixé Eum apprecamur, ut, beneplacito Ipsius
tempore, universe Suze Ecclesie beatum restituat
donum Unitatis in Veritate.

Latin Version of “ Address” of 1867. 93

Jam vero, fratres dilecti, vos in caritate cohortamur,
ut fidem semel sanctis traditam integram atque
illibatam conservetis, quemadmodum eam accepistis
a Jesu Christo Domino Nostro. Obsecramus vos,
vigilate, orate, et nobiscum toto corde certate contra
fallacias atque argutias, quibus jampridem et in hoc
ipso tempore fides impugnatur.

Obtestamur vos, constanter tenete, utpote firmum
Dei Verbum, omnes Canonicas Scripturas Veteris et
Novi Testamenti; et diligenti meditatione scrutantes
hec Dei Oracula, orantes in Spiritu Sancto, queratis
abundantils cognoscere Dominum Jesum Christum,
Verum Deum et Verum Hominem, semper colendum
atque adorandum, Quem nobis illa revelant, et
Voluntatem Dei in eis patefactam.

Insuper vos obsecramus, vosmet ipsos et vestros
custodite contra indies gliscentes superstitiones
atque additamenta quibus in hisce novissimis tem-
poribus Veritas Dei incrustatur ; quum in aliis, tum
precipue per universi principatis affectationem
dominantis in clero Dei, qui Romane sedia nonnullis
asseritur ; et per exaltationem, re ipsa manifestam,
Beatz Virginis Mariz in locum Mediatoris, vice Filii
ipsius Divini, et per orationes ei oblatas tanquam
inter Deum et homines Interpellatoris munere
fungenti. Cavete a talibus, vos obtestamur, probé
scientes honorem Suum Ipsius non alii dare Deum
zelotem.

Superedificamini, igitur, fratres carissimi, sanc-
tissimee fidei vestrze; crescite in gratia et in agnitione
et dilectione Jesu Christi Domini Nostri. Manifestum
facite omnibus, per fidem, abstinentiam, puritatem et
sanctum conversationem, et per vestros labores pro
populis inter quos Deus vos tam laté propagavit, et
per Evangelii praedicationem incredulis atque ethnicis,
vos revera esse servos Illius Qui mortuus est pro
nobis ut Patrem nobis reconciliaret, et ut pro peccatis
totius mundi sacrificium Semet Ipsum offerret.

Fratres dilecti, und voce vos admonemus. Tempus

94 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

breve est. Dominus venit. Vigilate, sobrii estote.
State firmi in communione sanctorum in qua vobis
Deus locum concessit. Studete fide coadunari
Christo in sanctissimo Corporis Ejus et Sanguinis
Sacramento. Firma tenete Symbola, et purum illum
Cultum atque Ordinem, quem gratia Dei a primitiva
Ecclesia hzreditarium vos possidetis. Cavete ne dis-
cessiones faciatis preter doctrinam quam accepistis.
Orate et sectamini Unitatem invicem et inter omnes
fideles in Jesu Christo. Et Dominus misericors
perficiat vos, et conservet integrum corpus, animam
et spiritum vestrum in Adventum Domini Nostri
Jesu Christi. Amen.
C. T.Cantuar. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus,
et totius Angliz Primas.
M.G. Armagh. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus,
et totius Hiberniz Primas.
ΚΝ. C. Dublin. Archiepiscopus, et Metropolitanus,
et Hiberniz Primas.
A. C. London. Episcopus.
Robert Eden, Moray, Ross, Caithness. Episcopus,
et Scotice Ecclesiz Primas, &c. &c.

EVKYTKAIOS ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ͂.

᾿Επισκόπων ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων, ἐν ἡμέραίς 24—27
μηνὸς Σεπτεμβρίου, ἔτει 1807.

Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, Πρεσβυτέροις, Διακόνοις
καὶ λαϊκοῖς τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ᾿Εκκλησίας, συγκοινωνοῖς
τοῦ Ayydtxod μέρους τῆς Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, χαίρειν
ἐν Κυρίῳ.

Ἡμεῖς οἱ ὑπογράψαντες ᾿Επίσκοποι, τῇ ἀγαθῇ τοῦ
Θεοῦ προνοίᾳ ὁμοθυμαδὸν é ἐπισυνηγμένοι,. κοινῶν προσευ-
χῶν ἕνεκα καὶ συμβουλεύσεως, ἐ ἐν τῷ τῆς Καντουαρίας
ἀρχιεπισκόπου παλατίῳ “Ααμβηθανῷ, δεόμεθα ὑπὲρ
ὑμῶν ἵνα λάβητε χάριν, ἔλεος, καὶ εἰρήνην ἀπὸ Θεοῦ

Greek Version of “Address” of 1867. 95

Ilatpos, καὶ tod Κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ Σωτῆρος *Incov
ΠΝ ei ay oie, δὲ

Εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ Θεῷ, ἀδελφοὶ ἀγαπητοὶ, ὑπὲρ τῆς
πίστεως ὑμῶν ἐν Κυρίῳ ἡμῶν᾽ Τησοῦ Χριστῷ, καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς
ὠγάπης εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους, ἥτις ἐπερίσσευσεν ἐν ὑμῖν, καὶ
ὑπὲρ τῆς Χριστοῦ ἐπιγνώσεως, ἣ dv ὑμῶν ἐξήχηται ἐν τοῖς
ἀνδρειοτάτοις τῆς οἰκουμένης ἔθνεσιν: καὶ ἑνὶ στόματι
δεήσεις ποιούμεθα πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν καὶ Πατέῤα, ἵνα τῇ
τοῦ ᾿Αγίου Πνεύματος δυνάμει σθενώσῃ ἡμᾶς τῇ ἰσχῦι
Αὐτοῦ, εἰς τὸ ἐπανορθῶσαι τὰ παραπίπτοντα, καὶ τὰ
λείποντα ἀναπληρῶσαι, καὶ ἐπεκτείνεσθαι εἰς ὑψηλότερα
ἀγάπης μέτρα καὶ ζήλου ἐν τῷ λατρεύειν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἐν τῷ
γνωρίζειν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ καὶ προσευχόμεθα ἵνα ἐν τῷ
δεκτῷ αὐτοῦ καιρῷ ἀποδῷ τῇ ὅλῃ Αὐτοῦ ἐκκλησιᾳ τὸ
μακαριστὸν χάρισμα τῆς ἑνότητος ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ.

Καὶ νῦν, ἀδελφοὶ, παρακαλοῦμεν ὑμᾶς ἐν ἀγάπῃ, ἵνα
τηρῆτε ὁλόκληρον καὶ ἀδιάφθορον τὴν ἅπαξ παραδοθεῖσαν
τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστιν, καθὼς αὐτὴν παρειλήφατε ἀπὸ τοῦ
Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ. ᾿Ερωτῶμεν ὑμᾶς ἵνα γρηγορῆτε καὶ
προσεύχησθε, καὶ ἀγωνίζησθε εὐκαρδίως μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν κατὰ
τῶν πανουργιῶν καὶ μεθοδειῶν, δι’ ὧν ἡ πίστις τὸ πρὶν
καὶ ἐν τῷ νῦν παρόντι χρόνῳ πορθεῖται.

Παρακαλοῦμεν ὑμᾶς ἵνα ἀσφαλῶς κρατῆτε, ὡς βέβαιον
Θεοῦ λόγον, πάσας τὰς κανονικὰς γραφὰς τῆς Παλαιᾶς
καὶ τῆς Καινῆς Διαθήκης, καὶ ἵνα, σπουδαίως ἐρευνῶντες
ταῦτα τὰ λόγια τοῦ Θεοῦ, ζητῆτε περισσοτέρως γνῶναι
τὸν Κύριον καὶ Σ᾽ ωτῆρα ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν, Θεὸν ἀληθινὸν
καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθινὸν, ᾧ πάντοτε προσκυνεῖν δεῖ καὶ
λατρεύειν, ὃν ai γραφαὶ ἡμῖν ἀνακαλύπτουσιν, καὶ τὸ
θέλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ, τὸ ἐν αὐταῖς φανερούμενον.

“Apa δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοὶ, διαμαρτυρόμεθα, φυλάξατε
ἑαυτοὺς καὶ τοὺς ὑμετέρους ἀπὸ τῶν ἀεὶ αὐξανομένων
ἐθελοθρησκειῶν καὶ ἐπιβληλημάτων, Sv’ ὧν ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ
ἀλήθεια ἐν τοῖς ὑστέροις τούτοις χρόνοις παραπέπλασται,
ἄλλως τε καὶ μάλιστα διὰ τῆς ἀντιποιήσεως μοναρχίας
οἰκουμενικῆς, κατακυριευούσης τοῦ κλήρου τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἧς
ἀξιοῦται παρὰ τισιν ἡ Ῥώμης καθέδρα; ἔτι δὲ διὰ τῆς
ἐνεργοῦ ὑπεράρσεως τῆς μακαρίας Παρθένου Μαρίας εἰς
τόπον Mecirov, ἀντὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ αὐτῆς αὐτοθέου, καὶ διὰ

96 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

προσευχῶν αὐτῇ προσφερομένων ὡς ἐντυγχανούσῃ ὑπὲρ
ἀνθρώπων παρὰ Θεῷ. “Προσέχετε ἀπὸ τοιούτων,
εἰδότες ὅ ὅτι τὴν τιμὴν ἑαυτοῦ οὐχ ἑτέρῳ δίδωσιν ὁ ζηλω-
τὴς Θεός.

: a 9 3 Gate ἂν τ τ A ΄ αὐ τῆς

Εποικοδομεῖσθε οὖν, ἀγαπητοὶ, ἐπὶ τῇ ἁγιωτάτῃ ὑμῶν
πίστει" αὐξάνεσθε ἐν χάριτι καὶ γνώσει καὶ ἀγάπῃ τοῦ
Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Karadei~ate ἐνώπιο»
πάντων, διὰ τῆς πίστεως, αὐταπαρνήσεως, ἁγνείας, καὶ
εὐσεβοῦς ἀναστροφῆς, ἅμα δὲ διὰ τῶν ὑμετέρων κόπων
ὑπὲρ τῶν λαῶν ἐν οἷς ὁ Θεὸς ὑμᾶς εἰς τοσοῦτον εὖρος
διαπεφύτευκε, καὶ διὰ τοῦ κηρύγματος τοῦ εὐαγγελίου
τοῖς ἀπίστοις καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, ὅτι τῷ ὄντι ἐστὲ δοῦλοι
᾿Εκείνου, ὃ ὃς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα καταλλάξῃ ἡ ἡμῖν
τὸν Πατέρα, καὶ ἵνα θυσίαν “Eavtov ἀνενέγκῃ ὑπὲρ τῶν
ἁμαρτιῶν ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου.

᾿Αδελφοὶ ἀγαπητοὶ, μιᾷ φωνῇ νουθετοῦμεν ὑμᾶς" ὁ
καιρὸς συνεσταλμένος" ὁ Κύριος ἔρχεται γρηγορεῖτε,
νήφετε. Στήκετε ἑδραῖον ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῶν ἁγίων, ἐν
ἢ Θεὸς ὑμῖν μερίδα κεχάρισται" ζητεῖτε ἐν πίστει
ἑνοῦσθαι τῷ Χριστῷ ἐν τῷ εὐλογημένῳ μυστηρίῳ τοῦ
σώματος Αὐτοῦ καὶ αἵματος. Κατέχετε στερεῶς τὰ
Σ ὕμβολα, καὶ τὴν καθαρὰν θρησκείαν καὶ τάξιν, ἣν
χάριτι Θεοῦ κεκληρονομήκατε ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ἐκκλης-
σίας. Βλέπετε μὴ διχοστασίας, ποιῆτε κατὰ τῆς
διδαχῆς ἣ ἣν ἐμάθετε. ᾿Ερωτᾶτε καὶ διώκετε ἐνότητα ἐν
ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ" καὶ
ὁ χρηστὸς Κύριος τελειώσαι ὑμᾶς, καὶ τηρήσαι ὑμῶν τὸ
σῶμα, τὴν ψυχὴν, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα, εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ
Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ. ᾿Αμήν.

Ο. T. CantTuaR. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης,
καὶ πρῶτος ὅλης τῆς ᾿Αγγλίας.

M.G. ARMAGH. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης,
καὶ πρῶτος ὅλης τῆς Ἱβερνίας.

R. C. Duspiin. ἀρχιεπίσκοπος, καὶ μητροπολίτης,
καὶ πρῶτος IBepvias.

A. C. ΤΌΝΡΟΝ. ἐπίσκοπος.

Ο. R. Winton. ἐπίσκοπος,

κιτ.λ.

No. IX. (See page 17.)

The Formal Resolutions of the Conference of
Sept. 24-27, 1867.

INTRODUCTION.

“We, Bishops of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church
in visible Communion with the United Church of
England and Ireland, professing the Faith delivered
to us in Holy Scripture, maintained by the Primitive
Church and by the Fathers of the English Reforma-
tion, now assembled, by the good providence of God,
at the Archiepiscopal Palace of Lambeth, under
the presidency of the Primate of all England, desire
—First, to give hearty thanks to Almighty God
for having thus brought us together for common
counsels and united worship ; Secondly, we desire to
express the deep sorrow with which we view the
divided condition of the flock of Christ throughout
the world, ardently longing for the fulfilment of the
prayer of our Lord, ‘ That all may be one, as Thou,
Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may
be one in us, that the world may believe that Thou
hast sent Με; and, Lastly, we do here solemnly
record our conviction that unity will be most effec-
tually promoted by maintaining the Faith in its
purity and integrity—as taught in the Holy Scrip-
tures, held by the Primitive Church, summed up in
the Creeds, and affirmed by the undisputed General
Councils,—and by drawing each of us closer to our
common Lord, by giving ourselves to much prayer
and intercession, by the cultivation of a spirit of
charity, and a love of the Lord’s appearing.”
Resolution I—*“ That it appears to us expedient,
for the purpose of maintaining brotherly intercom-
munion, that all cases of establishment of new Sees,
and appointment of new Bishops, be notified to all

98 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Archbishops and Metropolitans, and all presiding
Bishops of the Anglican Communion.”

Resolution II.— That, having regard to the con-
ditions under which intercommunion between mem-
bers of the Church passing from one distant Diocese
to another may be duly maintained, we hereby
declare it desirable,—

“(1) That forms of Letters Commendatory on
behalf of Clergymen visiting other Dioceses be drawn
up and agreed upon ;

“(2) That a form of Letters Commendatory for lay
members of the Church be in like manner prepared ;

“(3) That his Grace the Lord Archbishop of
Canterbury be pleased to undertake the preparation
of such forms.”

Resolution III.—* That a Committee be appointed
to draw up a Pastoral Address to all members of the
Church of Christ in communion with the Anglican
Branch of the Church Catholic, to be agreed upon
by the assembled Bishops, and to be published as
soon as possible after the last sitting of the Con-
ference.”

Resolution IV.—* That, in the opinion of this
Conference, Unity in Faith and Discipline will be
best maintained among the several branches of
the Anglican Communion by due and canonical sub-
ordination of the Synods of the several branches to
the higher authority of a Synod or Synods above
them.”

Resolution V.—“ That a Committee of seven
members (with power to add to their number, and
to obtain the assistance of men learned in Eccle-
siastical and Canon Law) be appointed to inquire
into and report upon the subject of the relations and
functions of such Synods, and that such Report be
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of
Canterbury, with a request that, if possible, it may
be communicated to any adjourned meeting of this
Conference.”

Formal Resolutions of Sepi., 1867. 99

Resolution VI.—“ That, in the judgment of the
Bishops now assembled, the whole Anglican Com-
munion is deeply injured by the present condition
of the Church in Natal; and that a Committee be
now appointed at this General Meeting to report
on the best mode by which the Church may be
delivered from the continuance of this scandal, and
the true faith maintained. That such Report be
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of
Canterbury, with the request that he will be pleased
to transmit the same to all the Bishops of the
Anglican Communion, and to ask for their judgment
thereupon.”

Resolution VII.—* That we who are here present
do acquiesce in the Resolution of the Convocation
of Canterbury, passed on June 29, 1866, relating to
the Diocese of Natal, to wit—

“<“Tf it be decided that a new Bishop should be
consecrated,— As to the proper steps to be taken
by the members of the Church in the province of
Natal for obtaining a new Bishop, it is the opinion
of this House,—/jirs¢, that a formal instrument, de-
claratory of the doctrine and discipline of the Church
of South Africa should be prepared, which every
Bishop, Priest, and Deacon to be appointed to office
should be required to subscribe ; secondly, that a
godly and well-learned man should be chosen by
the clergy, with the assent of the lay-communicants
of the Church; and; ¢#zrdly, that he should be pre-
sented for consecration, either to the Archbishop of
Canterbury,—if the aforesaid instrument should de-
clare the doctrine and discipline of Christ as received
by the United Church of England and Ireland,—or
to the Bishops of the Church of South Africa, accord-
ing as hereafter may be judged to be most advisable
and convenient.’ ”

Resolution VIII.—* That, in order to the binding
of the Churches of our Colonial Empire and the
Missionary Churches beyond them in the closest

100 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

union with the Mother-Church, it is necessary that
they receive and maintain without alteration the
standards of Faith and Doctrine as now in use in
that Church. That, nevertheless, each Province
should have the right to make such adaptations and
additions to the services of the Church as its peculiar
circumstances may require. Pvrovzded, that no change
or addition be made inconsistent with the spirit and
principles of the Book of Common Prayer, and that
all such changes be liable to revision by any Synod
of the Anglican Communion in which the said
Province shall be represented.”

Resolution IX.—“ That the Committee appointed
by Resolution V., with the addition of the names of
the Bishops of London, St. David’s, and Oxford, and
all the Colonial Bishops, be instructed to consider
the constitution of a voluntary spiritual tribunal, to
which questions of doctrine may be carried by appeal
from the tribunals for the exercise of discipline in
each Province of the Colonial Church, and that their
report be forwarded to his Grace the Lord Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, who is requested to communi-
cate it to an adjourned meeting of this Conference.”

Resolution X.— That the resolutions submitted
to this Conference relative to the discipline to be
exercised by Metropolitans, the Court of Metropo-
litans, the scheme for conducting the Election of
Bishops, when not otherwise provided for, the decla-
ration of submission to the Regulation of Synods,
and the question of what Legislation should be pro-
posed for the Colonial Churches, be referred to the
Committee specified in the preceding Resolution.”

Resolution XI.—“ That a special committee be
appointed to consider the Resolutions relative to the
notification of proposed Missionary Bishoprics, and
the Subordination of Missionaries.”

Resolution XII.—‘ That the question of the bounds
of the jurisdiction of different Bishops, when any
question may have arisen in regard to them, the

Correspondence with Dean Stanley. IOI

question as to the obedience of Chaplains of the
United Church of England and Ireland on the Con-
tinent, and the Resolution submitted to the Confer-
ence relative to their return and admission into
Home Dioceses, be referred to the Committee spe-
cified in the preceding Resolution.”

Resolution XIII.—* That we desire to render our
hearty thanks to Almighty God for the blessings
vouchsafed to us in and by this Conference; and we
desire to express our hope that this our meeting may
hereafter be followed by other meetings to be con-
ducted in the same spirit of brotherly love.”

No. X. (See page 18.)

Correspondence with the Dean of Westminster respect-
ing the use of Westminster Abbey in connection
with the Conference of 1867.

1. The Dean of Westminster to the Archbishop of
Canterbury.

DEANERY, WESTMINSTER,
September 21, 1867.

My DEAR LORD ARCHBISHOP,

I have been honoured with a communication from
your Grace, through the Bishop of London, request-
ing the use of Westminster Abbey for a special
service to be held for the English, American, and
Scottish Bishops now assembled in England, to be
held, as I understood, on September 28.

On all occasions it is my earnest desire to render
the Abbey and the precincts of Westminster available
for purposes of general utility and edification, and
this desire is increased when the request comes from
your Grace.

You will kindly allow me to state the difficulty

102 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

which I feel in the present instance. I have endea-
voured to act in such matters on the rule of granting
the use of the Abbey to such purposes, and such
only, as are either co-extensive with the Church of
England, or have a definite object of usefulness or
charity, apart from party or polemical considerations.

Your Grace will, I am sure, see that, however
much your Grace’s intentions would have brought
the proposed Conference at Lambeth within this
sphere, in fact, it can hardly be so considered. The
absence of the Primate and the larger part of the
Bishops of the Northern Province—not to speak of
the Bishops of India and Australia, and of other
important Colonial or Missionary Sees—must, even
irrespectively of other indications, cause it to present a
partial aspect of the English Church; whilst the
appearance of other prelates not belonging to our
Church, places it on a different footing from the
institutions which are confined to the Church of
England. And, further, the absence of any fixed
information as to the objects to be discussed and
promoted by the Conference, leaves me, in common
with all who stand outside, in uncertainty as to what
would be the proposals or measures which would
receive, by implication, the sanction given by the
use of the Abbey—a sanction which, in the case of a
church so venerable and national in its character,
ought, I conceive, to be lent only to public objects of
well-defined or acknowledged beneficence.

These are the grounds why I hesitate to take upon
myself the responsibility suggested. But, when
stating this difficulty, I feel so strongly the value of
the friendly intercourse to promote which has been
the chief intention of your Grace, and of, I doubt
not, many of the prelates who have concurred in
this Conference; and I am so desirous that the
Abbey should be made to minister to the edification
of large sections of our Church, even when not re-
presenting the whole, and of those outside our

Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 103

own immediate pale (especially our brethren from
America), who are willing to co-operate with us in
all things lawful and good—that I would gladly, if
possible, join in advancing such a purpose.

It has occurred to me, that, as the service indicated
by your Grace is to be held after the Conference is
finished, the Abbey might be granted for it, without
any relation to the Conference itself; but either for
some specific object, such as the Society for the
Propagation of the Gospel, or for other Home or
Foreign Missions of unquestioned importance, or
else (in those general terms which, as I apprehend,
express your Grace’s wishes) for the promotion of
brotherly goodwill and mutual edification amongst
all members of the Anglican Communion.

Under these circumstances, and on this under-
standing, which I should wish to be made as public
as the announcement of the service itself, I should
have great pleasure in the permitting the use of the
Abbey for such a service, to be held in the morning
or afternoon of September 28th (as may be deemed
most convenient), and I trust that, if this meets your
Grace’s wishes, your Grace will undertake to preach
on the occasion.

I beg to remain, my dear Lord Archbishop,
Yours faithfully and respectfully,
A. P. STANLEY.

2. Lhe Archbishop of Canterbury to the Dean of
Westminster.

ADDINGTON PARK, CROYDON,
September 25, 1867.

MY DEAR DEAN,

I laid your note before the Conference yesterday,
but it will probably not close its sittings on Friday
evening, as there is reason to believe that committees

104 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

will be appointed to report at a future date. Under
these circumstances, it is obvious, from the tenor of
your letter, that the Abbey is not open to us. I
regret, therefore, that we shall not be able to avail
ourselves of your kind offer, under the specified
conditions.

Believe me, my dear Dean,

Yours very truly,
C8 CANTUAR.

3. Lhe Dean of Westminster to the Archbishop of
Canterbury.

DEANERY, WESTMINSTER,
September 27, 1867.

MY DEAR LORD ARCHBISHOP,

I have to acknowledge, with thanks, your Grace’s
letter of the 25th, and to express my regret that
your Grace and the Bishops assembled should have
felt themselves precluded from accepting my proposal
—in reply to your Grace’s request—to meet in the
Abbey for “some specific object of charity or useful-
ness,’ or for the purpose of promoting brotherly
goodwill and mutual edification amongst all members
of the Anglican Communion.

I beg, however, that you will assure the prelates
assembled, especially those of our American brethren,
for whose sake, as I stated in my former letter, I
especially proposed to grant the use of the Abbey as
before mentioned; that if they, or any of them
should wish to attend the services in the Abbey on
Sunday next (at Io a.m. or at 3 p.m.) every accom-
modation and welcome shall be afforded.

I beg to remain, my dear Lord Archbishop,

Yours faithfully and respectfully,
A.>P; (STANLEY:

Correspondence with Dean Stanley. 105

4. The Dean of Westminster to the Bishop of Vermont,
Presiding Bishop of the American Church.

DEANERY, WESTMINSTER,
October 1, 1867.

MY DEAR LoRD BISHOP,

Understanding that there has been’ some mis-
apprehension on the part of the American bishops
as to their invitation to a service in Westminster
Abbey, I beg that you will do me the favour of
communicating the following statement, in as public
a way as you may think fit, to your Episcopal
brethren.

It was impossible for me, as guardian of a building
like the Abbey, which belongs to the whole Church
and people of England, to take the responsibility of
giving its sanction to a meeting which included only
a portion of the English bishops, and of which the
objects were undefined, the issues unknown, and the
discussions secret. But I was so anxious to show
every courtesy to the bishops from the United
States, that, chiefly on their own account, as I par-
ticularly specified in my letter to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, I so far deviated from the usual rules
which guide the services in the Abbey as to propose
the use of the Abbey for a service which should
gather them there, either for some specific object of
usefulness or charity or for the general promotion of
goodwill and edification amongst all members of the
Anglican Communion. I was encouraged the more
to make this offer by the pledge that I had received
that no questions exciting party differences should
be introduced into the meetings, and I was therefore
in hopes that his Grace would have felt himself able
to accept a proposal which I had reason to believe
would be gratifying to our American brethren.

The proposal was, however, declined ; and I must
therefore, through you, beg to express my regret that
such an opportunity was lost of cultivating those

106 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

feelings of amity between the two countries which
are at all times so welcome.

The circumstances of the severe domestic affliction
which has recently befallen us, whilst they prevented
me from showing that hospitality which I should
otherwise have offered to you, make me doubly
anxious that, in a country from which we have
received expressions of such sincere sympathy, there
should be no misunderstanding as to the cordial
desire that I entertain to welcome Americans on all
occasions to our joint national sanctuary.

I trust that on some future occasion I may take
the opportunity of renewing personally my assurance
of the pleasure which it will ever give me to receive
the citizens of a nation in which we must always feel
peculiar interest.

I beg to remain,

Yours faithfully,
A. P. STANLEY.

No. XI. (See page 18.)

Sermon of Bishop Fulford, of Montreal, preached
in Lambeth Parish Church on September 28,
1867.

Bishop Fulford’s sermon was not published, but the following
compressed report of it appeared in the Guardian of October
2, 1867, p. 1058 :-—

“The Bishop of Montreal selected as his text,
Psalm iv. 6. ‘There be many that say, who will
shew us any good?’ ‘The Bishop observed :

“Tf no public notice had been given of the fact,
it might be perceived from the presence of so many
of those Bishops who had been attending the meeting
lately held in Lambeth Palace, that there was a

Sermon of the Bishop of Montreat. 107

special connection of the service of the day with
the meeting. The business before the Conference
was not entirely closed, because there were some
committees appointed to carry out certain. details and
principles, especially in connection with the Colonial
Church, and they would have to make their report
at an adjourried meeting. But that, however, which
concerned the whole community had been discussed,
and a very important and solemn pastoral letter had
been adopted, and signed unanimously by every
member of the conference, to be sent out to the
whole world. It was thought fitting that, as the
Bishops had met in such large numbers, they should
close their conference with a special service, and the
celebration of the Holy Communion. He (the
Bishop of Montreal) had undertaken to occupy the
office on that occasion, at the request of the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, at very short notice, but he
should endeavour to discharge the duty imposed
upon him to the best of his ability. No one felt
more fully than he did the importance of the meet-
ing they had held, both as to what they had done
and said, and what they had left undone and unsaid.
And no one was more deeply sensible than himself
of how much they owed to the Christian courage
‘and large-heartedness which had enabled the Arch-
bishop to make this great venture, and of his gentle,
manly conduct and courtesy, in presiding over so
large a gathering, and in bringing it to so successful an
issue. How many persons had said, ‘Who will shew
us any good?’ But, notwithstanding the sneers of
the scornful, between seventy and eighty Bishops,
holding Office in the Church of Christ, and re-
presenting the Anglican branch (in former years
represented as confined to the British Isles), had
come together at the Archbishop’s invitation, so that
every portion of the Church in every quarter of the
globe had one representative or many representatives
present. Some had come 10,000 or 12,000 miles to
H 2

Ιοϑ Lambeth Conference of 1867.

be present, and if they had done nothing more’than
give physical testimony to their oneness of faith and
resolve upon that solemn pastoral, they would have
done more for the unity of the Church than had been
accomplished for the last 100 years. The Conference,
however, had not confined its attention to that im-
portant document ; many other matters had received
earnest attention ; and in the interchange of thought
- from minds of such different constitution, trained in
so many different schools, moulded by such varying
circumstances, living in such diverse positions, and
influenced by such various surroundings, they had
learnt to know and to love each other: the lesson has
been of incalculable importance, and he thanked
God for the great benefit which had thus been
conferred upon all of them. Invitations to attend
had been issued to 144 Bishops ; many were utterly
unable to accept it, and only a very small portion of
them were not anxious to attend. All of these
bishoprics had derived their existence and succession
from the See of Canterbury, and between sixty and
seventy were the result of the progress of the last few
years. As regarded Canada, he had only to look
back for sixteen years, when that province certainly
possessed Bishops and a small number of mission-
aries, but the Church had no system of united actiom,
and no concentrated method of order and government.
But there was a meeting held at Quebec, such as the
present gathering had been, and from it had sprung
a regular system of synodical action, which was now
in full vigour and power, and regularly constituted,
and which progressed harmoniously, so that there
was every reason to consider the Church in Canada
as an established branch of Christ’s holy Catholic
Church. Then, again, in the United States, which
had been so ably and so worthily represented at this
Conference, he could but remember with feelings of
gratitude the last General Convention of the Epis-
copal Church which he was privileged to attend. It

Sermon of the Bishop of Montreal. 109

was gathered together immediately after the country
had been torn by internal dissensions, and when the
whole social system had been rent by political dis-
turbances. It was feared that the South would not
again join the North; that political differences and
party jealousy would prevent reunion; but God's
providence ruled otherwise, and it was a most im-
posing sight, and one he could never forget, when
the Bishops of the South took their accustomed
places as before that unhappy war ;—yes, that sight
caused tears to flow down many a manly cheek, and
when the aged prelates who presided, called aloud for
a thanksgiving, their voices rose together even as one,
shouting Gloria in excelsis Deo. And so with our
own branch of the Church at home, it may have its
trials and difficulties, but it was becoming day by
day more instinct with energy and zeal. What ever
threatening aspects might hover over her, she was
yet a great and unspeakable blessing to the nation ;
she was great through herself.and through her
children ; but she would be the greatest of all if she
remained true to her noble mission and faithful to
her Lord, the great Head of the Church ; and thus he
trusted that both in its present and future influences,
the Conference just concluded might be fraught
with increasing blessings to her and to her faithful
children.”

110 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

No. XII. (See page 19.)

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES APPOINTED
BY THE CONFERENCE OF 1867.

A.—Report of the Committee appointed under Re-
solution V., by the Conference of Bishops of the
Anglican Communion, held at Lambeth Palace,
September 24-27th, 18671 |

The subject of the functions and relations of the
several Synods, on which the Committee is appointed
to report, appears to them to be necessarily connected
with questions as to the constitution of these bodies,
The following Report, therefore, embraces the whole
subject of Synods. In discussing it, your Committee
deems it necessary to deal with the question in the
abstract, without reference to existing laws and
usages in the several branches of the Anglican Com-
munion, and to lay down general principles, the
adoption or application of which must depend on
circumstances, such, for example, as the laws which
any Church may have inherited or already esta-
blished.

1 Resolution IV.—‘ That, in the opinion of this Conference,
Unity in Faith and Discipline will be best maintained among
the several branches of the Anglican Communion by due and
canonical subordination of the Synods of the several branches
to the higher authority of a Synod or Synods above them.”

Resolution V.—‘‘ That a Committee of seven members (with
power to add to their number, and to obtain the assistance of
men learned in Ecclesiastical and Canon Law) be appointed to
inquire into and report upon the subject of the relations and
functions of such Synods, and that such Report be forwarded
to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with a request
that, if possible, it may be communicated to any adjourned
meeting of this Conference.”

Reports of Committees, 1867. III

I.—In the organisation of Synodal order for the
government of the Church, the Diocesan Synod
appears to be the primary and simplest form of such
organisation.

By the Diocesan Synod the co-operation of all
members of the body is obtained in Church action ;
and that acceptance of Church rules is secured,
which, in the absence of other law, usage, or enact-
ment, gives to these rules the force of laws “ binding
on those who, expressly or by implication, have
consented to them.” 4

For this reason, wherever the Church is not
established by law, it is, in the judgment of your
Committee, essential to order and good government
that the Diocese should be organised by a Synod.

Your Committee consider that it is not at variance
with the ancient principles of the Church, that both
Clergy and Laity should attend the Diocesan Synod,
and that it is expedient that the Synod should con-
sist of the Bishop and Clergy of the Diocese, with
Representatives of the Laity.

The constitution of the Diocesan Synod may be
determined either by rules for that branch of the
Church established by the Synod of the Province, or
by general consent in the Diocese itself, its rules
being sanctioned afterwards by the Provincial Synod

Your Committee, however, recommend that the
following general rules should be adopted ; viz., that
the Bishop, Clergy, and Laity should sit together,
the Bishop presiding ; that votes should be taken by
orders, whenever demanded ; and that the concurrent
assent of Bishop, Clergy, and Laity should be
necessary to the validity of all acts of the Synod.

They consider that the Clerical members of the
Synod should be those Clergy who are recognized
by the Bishop, according to the rules of the Church

1 Judgment of Judicial Committee of Privy Council in case
of Long v. Bishop of Capetown. 1 Moore, P.C.C., N.S., 461.

112 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

in that Diocese, as being under his jurisdiction.
Whether in large Dioceses, when the Clergy are very
numerous, they might appear by representation, is a
difficult question, and one on which your Committee
are not prepared to express an opinion.

The Lay Representatives in the Synod ought, in
the judgment of your Committee, to be Male Com-
municants of at least one year’s standing in the
Diocese, and of the full age of twenty-one. It should
be required that the electors should be Members
of the Church in that Diocese, and belong to the
parish in which they claim to vote. It appears
desirable that the regular meetings of the Synod
should be fixed and periodical; but that the right
of convening special meetings whenever they may
be required should be reserved to the Bishop.

The office of the Diocesan Synod is, generally, to
make regulations, not repugnant to those of higher
Synods, for the order and good government of the
Church within the Diocese, and to promulgate the
decisions of the Provincial Synod. —

II.—The Provincial Synod—or, as it is called in
New Zealand, the General Synod, and in the United
States the General Convention—is formed, whenever
it does not exist already by law and usage, through
the voluntary association of Dioceses for united
legislation and common action. The Provincial
Synod not only provides a method for securing unity
amongst the Dioceses which are thus associated, but
also forms the link between these Dioceses and other
Churches of the Anglican Communion.

Without questioning the right of the Bishops of any
Province to meet in Synod by themselves, and without
affirming that the presence of others is essential to a
Provincial Synod, your Committee recommend that,
whenever no law or usage to the contrary already
exists, it should consist of the Bishops of the Province,
and of Representatives both of the Clergy and of the
Laity in each Diocese.

Reports of Committees, 1867. 113

Your Committee need not define the method in
which a Provincial Synod may be first constituted,
but they assume that its constitution and rules will be
determined by the concurrence of the several Dioceses
duly represented.

Your Committee consider that it must be left to
each Province to decide whether, and under what
circumstances, the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity in a
Provincial Synod should sit and discuss questions in
the same chamber or separately ; but, in the judg-
ment of the Committee, the votes should in either
case be taken by orders ; and the concurrent assent
of Bishops, Clergy,and Laity should be necessary for
any legislative action, wherever the Clergy and Laity
form part of the constitution of a Provincial Synod ;
such powers and functions not involving legislation
being reserved as belong to the Bishops by virtue of
their office.

The number, qualification, and mode of election of
the Clerical and Lay Representatives from each
Diocese must be determined by the Synods in the
several Provinces.

It is the office of the Provincial Synod, generally,
to exercise, within the limits of the Province, powers
in regard to Provincial questions similar to those
which the Diocesan Synod exercises, within the
Diocese, in regard to Diocesan questions.

As to the relation between these two Synods, your
Committee are of opinion that the Diocese is bound
to accept positive enactments of a Provincial Synod
in which it is duly represented, and that no Diocesan
regulations have force, if contrary to the decisions of
a higher Synod ; but that, in order to prevent any
collision or misunderstanding, the spheres of action
of the several Synods should be defined on the follow-
ing principle, viz., That the Provincial Synod should
deal with questions of common interest to the whole
Province, and with those which affect the communion
of the Dioceses with one another and with the rest of

114 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

the Church ; whilst the Diocesan Synod should be
left free to dispose of matters of local interest, and to
manage the affairs of the Diocese.

From this principle your Committee draws the
following conclusions :—

I. All alterations in the Services of the Church,
required by circumstances in the Province, should be
made or authorized by the Provincial Synod, and not
merely by the Diocesan. :

2. The rule of discipline for the Clergy of the
Province should be framed by the Provincial Synod.

3. Rules for the trial of Clergy should be made by
the Provincial Synod ; but, in default of such action
on the part of that Synod, the Diocesan Synod should
establish provisional rules for this purpose. The
Provincial Tribunal of Appeal should be established
by the Provincial Synod.

4. In questions relating to Patronage, the tenure
of Church property, Parochial divisions, arrange-
ments, officers, &c., there should be joint action of
the Diocese and the Province; the former making
such regulations as may be best suited to develop
local resources, the latter providing against the ad-
mission of any principle inexpedient for the common
interests of the Church.

5. The erection of a new Diocese within the limits
of an existing Diocese should proceed by general
rules established by the Provincial Synod.

6. The question of the election of a Bishop it is
unnecessary here to consider, as it is submitted to
another Committee.

III.—The question of a Riher Synod of the
Anglican Communion, and of the relation which the
inferior Synods should hold towards it, whenever it
might assemble, is one, your Committee are aware,
of much greater difficulty than any of those which
have been previously considered.

The fact, however, that a Conference of Bishops
of the whole Anglican Communion has already met

Reports of Committees, 1867. 115

together, is of itself an indication of the need which
is generally felt of united counsel in a sphere more
extensive than that of a Provincial Synod. Indeed,
the Resolutions under which this Committee was
appointed contemplate the possibility at least of
some Synod being established superior to the Pro-
vincial. It is also implied in Resolution VIII. of
this Conference, that some such Assembly may be
required, in order to preserve Colonial and Missionary
Churches in close union with the Church of England,
since it is provided that all changes in the Services
of the Church made by one of their Provincial Synods
should “be liable to revision by any Synod of the
Anglican Communion in which the said Province
should be represented.”

The objections that may be urged against the
united action of Churches which are more or less. free
to act independently, and other Churches whose
constitution is fixed, not only by ancient ecclesiastical
laws and usages, but by the law of the State, are
obvious; but it appears to your Committee that the
action of this Conference has proved that the diffi-
culties which are anticipated are not insuperable, and
suggests the method by which they may be overcome.
Under present circumstances, indeed, no Assembly
that might be convened would be competent to enact
canons of binding ecclesiastical authority on these
different bodies, or to frame definitions of faith which
it would be obligatory on the Churches of the
Anglican Communion to accept. It would be neces-
sary, therefgre, in the judgment of your Committee,
to avoid all terms respecting this Assembly that
might imply authority of this nature, and to call it
a Congress, if even the term Council should be con-
sidered open to objection. Its decisions could only
possess the authority which might be derived from
the moral weight of such united counsels and judg-
ments, and from the voluntary acceptance of its con-
clusions by any of the Churches there represented.

116 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Your Committee consider that his Grace the
Archbishop of Canterbury, as occupying the See
from which the Colonial and American Churches
derive their succession, should be the convener of
such an Assembly. That it should differ from the
present Conference in being attended by both Clerical
and Lay Representatives of the several Churches,
as consultees and advisers, each Diocese being
allowed to send, besides its Bishop, a presbyter and
a lay member of the Church, if they should desire
to be thus represented; and further, in the proceed-
ings being more formal and, in part at least, public.
The question when for the first time, and at what
periods, this Congress or Council should be called,
your Committee deem it more respectful to leave for
the consideration of his Grace the Archbishop of
Canterbury and of the present Conference.

G. A. NEW ZEALAND, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.

Reports of Committees, 1867. 117

B.—Report of the Committee appointed under Resolu-
tion IX. of the Lambeth Conference, on the Constt-
tution of a voluntary spiritual Tribunal, to which
questions of Doctrine may be carried by Appeal
JSrom the Tribunals for the exercise of discipline in
each Province of the Colonial Church}

After full consideration of objections that have
been urged against the establishment of any such
Tribunal as that contemplated by this Resolution,
your Committee are of opinion that these objections
are not sufficient to outweigh the arguments in its
favour, and that most of the objections will be found
inapplicable to the particular form of Tribunal which
the Committee recommend.

Your Committee consider that such a Tribunal is
required in order to prevent the dissatisfaction which
would arise if important questions were finally decided
by those Colonial Churches, the circumstances. of
which render it impossible for them to form a suffi-
cient Tribunal of last resort.

It would also tend to secure unity in matters of
Faith, and uniformity in matters of Discipline, where
Doctrine may be involved.

For these reasons your Committee recommend that
such a Tribunal be established ; and from the desire

1 Resolution IX.—‘That the Committee appointed by
Resolution V., with the addition of the names of the Bishops of
London, St. David’s, and Oxford, and all the Colonial Bishops,
be instructed to consider the constitution of a voluntary spiri-
tual Tribunal, to which questions of doctrine may be carried
by appeal from the Tribunals for the exercise of discipline in
each Province of the Colonial Church, and that their report be
forwarded to his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury,
who is requested to communicate it to an adjourned meeting
of this Conference.”

118 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

expressed by several branches of the Colonial Church,
that this should be one of the results of this Confer-
ence, they believe that it will be generally accepted
by those for whose benefit it is designed.

At the same time, they are sensible of the great
difficulty of forming such a Tribunal, and of the
necessity of proceeding with caution, lest it should
interfere with the liberties of the Colonial Churches,
or should have any appearance of collision with the
Courts established by law, either here or in Her
Majesty’s foreign possessions.

Your. Committee now proceed to lay before the
Conference their conclusions as to the functions and
constitution of the proposed Tribunal.

They are of opinion that it should not take cogni-
zance of any case which shall not have been referred
to it by some branch of the Anglican Communion
which has consented to its constitution. Thus it
would not interfere either with those Churches in
which provision is made by the State for the exercise
of discipline, or with the liberty and rights of eccle-
siastical Provinces. These would be free to accept
or to decline the appeal thus offered to them, and to
withdraw afterwards their acceptance of the Tribunal,
if they should so desire,}

Your Committee consider that this Tribunal of
Appeal should take into consideration all the facts of
the case as sent up to it in writing from the inferior
Tribunal; that the Appeal, however, should not be
on the facts, but only on the points of Doctrine and
Discipline involved in them.

That during the Appeal the sentence of the Pro-
vincial Tribunal should continue in force, so far as it

' The decisions of such a Tribunal would be of the same
nature as those of “arbitrators, whose jurisdiction rests
entirely upon the agreement of the parties.” (Judgment of
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in case of Long wv.
Bishop of Capetown, τ Moore, P. C. C., N.S. 462.)

Reports of Committees, 1867. [9

affects the present exercise of spiritual functions by
the accused.

That the judgments of the Tribunal of Appeal
should be delivered in the form of a decision that the
teaching or practice of the accused party is (or is
not) permissible.

That the Tribunal should use as the standards of
faith and doctrine by which its decisions shall be
governed, those which are now in use in the United
Church of England and Ireland; and that as to all
matters not defined in such formularies, the judg-
ments should be framed on any conclusions which
shall be hereafter agreed to at any Council or
Congress of the whole Anglican Communion:
Provided always, that no such conclusion be contra-
dictory to any now existing standard or formulary of
the Church of England; and provided further, that
the Synod of that Province of the Church from which
the Appeal shall be sent, shall not have refused to -
accept such conclusion.

Your Committee further recommend, subject to
any regulations that may be made at any future
Conference of the Anglican Communion :—

That, as it is a Tribunal for decisions in matters
of faith, Archbishops and Bishops only should be
judges, his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canter-
bury being the President.

That each Province in the Colonial Church should
have the right of electing two members of the
Tribunal ; and that all the Dioceses of the Colonial
Church not associated into Provinces should collec-
tively have the right of electing two. That each
Province of the United Church of England and
Ireland should be requested to elect two members,
but that the Province of Canterbury should elect
three, in the event of his Grace the Archbishop not
acting as President. That the Episcopal Church in
Scotland should have the right of electing two. And
(as it appears probable that the Protestant Episcopal

120 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Church in the United States would avail itself of
such a Tribunal) that Church should have the right
of electing five members.

In the judgment of the Committee, the Bishops of
the several Churches should elect those who shall
represent them on this Tribunal.

That, so soon after January I, 1869, as any ten
names shall have been forwarded to the Archbishop
of Canterbury as having been elected, the Tribunal
should be deemed to be constituted.

That of the members thus elected, seven should
form a quorum for the transaction of business, but a
smaller number should have power to adjourn from
time to time.

That the members of the Tribunal should con-
tinue in office, unless their seat be vacated by death,
resignation, or removal. by the electing body; but
that, in the event of any Bishop of the Colonial or
American Church notifying to the electing body that
he is unable or declines to attend at any sitting of
the Tribunal to which he may be summoned, it
should be lawful for the body by which he was
elected to appoint, instead of him, any Bishop of the
Anglican Communion other than one of those
already elected.

That, in the event of the Archbishop of Canter-
bury for the time being declining or being unable to
act as President, it should be lawful for his Grace,
if he should see fit, to nominate any other member
of the Tribunal to act as President in his room; and
in the event of no such appointment being made by
him, that it should be lawful for the Tribunal at
its first meeting to elect one of its members as
President.

That the summons for the sitting of the Tribunal
should be issued within thirty days from the time of
the notice of Appeal being delivered by the agent of
the Appellant to the proper officer of the Tribunal.

That the action of the Tribunal should not be

Reports of Committees, 1867. 121

impeded by the absence from it of any of those
who are at liberty to sit in it, provided there be a
quorum.

That, before the assembling of the Tribunal for
the hearing of an Appeal, the President should
nominate as Assessors three theologians and three
persons learned in the law, who should be present
at the trial, and should answer any questions as to
theological learning and law put to them by the
Tribunal through its President in writing, and
who should be at liberty to tender in writing to the
Tribunal through its President their opinion upon
any point of theological learning or law which
may arise, and that the Tribunal should be bound
to consider such opinion before coming to its
decision.

That parties before the Tribunal may be repre-
sented by any counsel they may select, whether
theologians or persons learned in the law.

That the rules of procedure of the said Tribunal,
except as here provided for, should, as far as possible,
be those of the higher Courts of Law, and that any
necessary alterations in such rules should be made
by the Tribunal itself.

That no sentence should be passed without the
assent thereto of two-thirds of the Judges present
during the trial.

That, at the time of delivering judgment, each
member of the Tribunal who has been present
during the trial should give his decision in writing,
and may read, or cause to be read, openly in Court
his decision, and the reasons for it; and that the
judgment of the prescribed majority should be the
judgment of the Tribunal.

F. MONTREAL, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.

[22 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

C.—On the Courts of Metropolitans, and the Trial
of a Lishop or Metropolitan}

I. Your Committee consider that the constitution
of the Provincial Tribunal for Appeals from the
decisions of Diocesan Tribunals should be deter-
mined, whenever it is not fixed by law, by the
Synod of the Province; but it is expedient, in their
judgment, that its rules should be assimilated, as far
as circumstances will admit, to those of the proposed
tribunal of Appeal in England.

II. In the case of charges against a Bishop, they
suggest the following as general principles :—

That each Province should determine by rules
made in its own Synod the offences for which a
Bishop may be presented for trial, and who should
be promoters of the charge.

That the charge should be presented to the
Metropolitan.

That it appears doubtful whether a preliminary
inquiry is expedient, provided that sufficient pre-
cautions are taken that no frivolous charges should
be entertained.

That the Metropolitan should summon to the
hearing of the cause all the Bishops of the Province
(except the accused), who should sit as judges, not
merely as assessors.

* Resolution X.—“ That the Resolutions submitted to this
Conference relative to the discipline to be exercised by the
Metropolitans, the Court of Metropolitans, the scheme for con-
ducting the Election of Bishops, when not otherwise provided
for, the declaration of submission to the Regulation of Synods,
and the question of what Legislation should be proposed for
the Colonial Churches, be referred to the Committee specified
in the preceding Resolution.”

Reports of Committees, 1867. 123

That no trial should take place, except before
two-thirds of the Bishops of the Province, provided
that there be never fewer than three Bishops present,
including the Metropolitan.

That if three Bishops of the Province should be
unable to attend, it should be lawful for the Metro-
politan to call in one or more Bishops not of the
Province.

That it is desirable that, whenever it may be
practicable, there should be Assessors, as recom-
mended by this Committee for the higher Tribunal
of Appeal.

That, in case of the non-appearance of the accused
after sufficient citations, the trial may go forward
as if he were present, or he may be punished for
contumacy, according as the Province may prescribe.

That there should be no sentence except by the
judgment of two-thirds of the Tribunal, or by three
judges, whichever should be the greater number ; the
assent of the Metropolitan not being necessary to
the sentence.

That the general rules of procedure should be
framed by the Synod of the Province; but should
be, as far as possible, similar to those recommended
by this Committee for the proposed Tribunal of
Appeal.

That an appeal to the higher Tribunal recom-
mended by this Committee should be allowed when
the case is one of doctrine, or discipline involving
doctrine, if notice of such appeal be given within

days from the delivery of sentence ;
and that, in all cases, proper provision should be
made for a new trial on sufficient reason being
shown.

That there should be no contract not to appeal to
Civil Courts ; but that sufficient provision should be
made by the Declaration of Submission (to be con-
sidered in another Report) that the sentence of the
Spiritual Tribunals may be effective.

124 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

That a Metropolitan should be tried in the same
manner as any other Bishop—the senior Bishop, in
that case, acting in the place of the Metropolitan.

F. MONTREAL, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.

D.—Scheme for conducting the Election of Bishops,
when not otherwise provided for. ‘

Your Committee have to consider the proper
mode for conducting the election of a Bishop, when-
ever it is not provided for by an existing law, and
without reference to any question that might arise
as to the temporalities connected with the See.

It is evident that there are two parties whose con-
current action is necessary in such an appointment
—viz., the Clergy and Laity of the Diocese, and the
Bishops οὗ the Province by whom the person elected
as Bishop is consecrated.

Your Committee are of opinion that, in accord-
ance with the ancient usages of the Church, the elec-
tion as a general rule should be made by the Diocese,
and that the Bishops of the Province should confirm
the election. They consider, however, that it is con-
sistent with this principle that the Diocese should
nominate two or more persons, of whom the Bishops
of the Province should select one; or that the
Diocese should delegate to any person or body the
power of choosing a Bishop for the vacant See, it
being understood that the Diocese must accept such
choice as final.

The principle of the concurrent action of the two
parties concerned would also be preserved if the
Bishops of the Province should nominate two or

Reports of Committees, 1867. 125

more persons, from whom the Diocese should elect
one.

In the election by the Diocese it appears to your
Committee that the right of selecting the person
who shall be their Bishop belongs to the Clergy, the
Laity having the right of accepting or rejecting the
person so chosen. But it is expedient, in their
judgment, that the election should always be made
by the Diocesan Synod, wherever one is established,
and in accordance with the rules of that Synod. In
those Dioceses in which there is no Diocesan Synod,
they recommend that, for the election of a Bishop,
a Convention should be summoned by the Dean,
senior Archdeacon, or senior Presbyter of the
Diocese ; that this Convention should consist of all
Presbyters and of lay-representatives, who should be
male communicants of at least twenty-one years of
age ; that these representatives should be elected by
each parish or congregation, in such manner as
should be determined by the convener; that the
person who should obtain the majority of votes of the
Clergy, and also of those of the lay-representatives
present at the Convention, should be accounted to
be elected to the Bishopric ; that this election should
not be vitiated by the absence of any of the parties
summoned, or by the failure of any congregation or
parish to elect a. lay-representative ; that any ques-
tion as to the validity of the election to the vacant
See should be submitted, prior to the Consecration,
to the Consecrating Bishops, whose decision should
be final ; and that after the consecration of a Bishop
no objection should be entertained.

They further recommend that, where the Diocese
is included in a Province, the confirmation of an
election should be by the Metropolitan and a
majority of the Bishops of the Province ; but where
the Diocese is extra-Provincial, that the confirmation
should rest with the Archbishops of Canterbury and
York and the Bishop of London; that the power of

126 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

confirmation should be absolute—the Bishops having
the right to refuse to confirm the election, without
assigning any reason for their refusal.

All further rules necessary for conducting the
election should, in the opinion of your Committee,
be made by the Synod of the Province.

F. MONTREAL, Chairman. .
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.

E.—Onx Declaration of Submission to Regulations of
Synod.

Your Committee recommend that, in all branches
of the Church, the government of which is not
determined by law, a Declaration should be made
by. those who hold office therein. They consider
that a Declaration is necessary, in order to define
the conditions of the consensual compact, and that
it should be framed so as to secure submission to
all synodical action in its legitimate sphere, and to
the decisions of the constituted Tribunals.

They recommend the following declaration to be
made, before the Metropolitan, or some person duly
appointed by him, by all Bishops elect, either before
their consecration or, if already consecrated, before
exercising any Episcopal functions in _ their
diocese :—

“TA. &., chosen Bishop of the Church and See
of , do promise that I will teach and
maintain the doctrine and discipline of the United
Church of England and Ireland, as acknowledged
and received by the Province of , and 1
also do declare that I consent to be bound by all the
rules and regulations which have heretofore been

Reports of Committees, 1867. 127

made or which may from time to time be made, by
the Synod of the Diocese of , and
the Provincial Synod of , or either of
them; and, in consideration of being appointed
Bishop of the said Church or See of

hereby undertake immediately to resign the said
appointment, together with all the rights and emolu-
ments appertaining thereto, if sentence requiring such
resignation should at any time be passed upon me,
after due examination had, by the Tribunal acknow-
ledged by the Synod of the said Province for the
trial of a Bishop ; saving all rights of Appeal allowed
by the said Synod,”

They recommend that the following Declaration
be made (in addition to the Declaration required by
the rulesof that Province or Diocese as to doctrine
and worship) by persons to be admitted to holy
orders, and by Clergymen to be admitted to the cure
of souls, or to any other office of trust in the Church.

“T, A. B., do declare that I consent to be bound by
all the rules and regulations which have heretofore
been made, or which may from time to time be
made, by the Synod of the Diocese of :
and the Provincial Synod of , or either of
them; [and in consideration of being appointed

, 1 hereby undertake immediately to
resign the said appointment, together with all the
rights and emoluments appertaining thereto, if
sentence requiring such resignation should at any
time be passed upon me, after due examination had,
by the Tribunal appointed by the Synods of the
aforesaid Province and Diocese for the trial of a
Clergyman ; saving all rights of Appeal allowed by
the said Synod].”

(The part in brackets to be omitted when there is
no appointment to a cure of souls, or office of
trust.)

Your Committee consider that it must be left to
the Province or Diocese to decide whether laymen

128 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

who are admitted to any office or position of trust
should be required to sign a Declaration of the same
nature.

G. A. NEW ZEALAND, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.

F.—Ox Provinces and Subordination to
Metropolitans.

On this subject your Committee beg to report as
follows :—

They are of opinion that the association or fede-
ration of Dioceses within certain territorial limits,
commonly called an Ecclesiastical Province, is not
only in accordance with the ancient laws and usages
of the Christian Church, but is essential to its
complete organization.

Such an association is of the highest advantage for
united action, for the exercise of discipline, for the
confirmation of the election of Bishops, and generally
to enable the Church to adapt its laws to the circum-
stances of the countries in which it is planted.

It is expedient, in the judgment of your Com-
mittee, that these ecclesiastical divisions should, as
far as possible, follow the civil divisions of these
countries. |

Of the Bishops of these Dioceses thus associated,
one, in conformity with ancient usage, ought to be
Metropolitan or Primus, the functions and powers
of the Metropolitan being determined by synodical
action in the Province, except so far as Metropolitical
powers are defined by undisputed General Councils
of the Church.

It seems to your Committee most in accordance

‘Reports of Committees, 1867. 129

with primitive usage that the Metropolitical See
should be fixed, but they do not deem this to be
essential. It appears expedient that the Provincial
Synod should have the power of changing, when
‘necessary, the site of the Metropolitical See.

Your Committee do not consider it necessary that
the election to the Metropolitical See should be
conducted differently from the election to other
vacant sees; since the Bishops of the Province
possess the right of confirming or refusing to confirm
any election.

Your Committee strongly recommend that all
those Dioceses which are not as yet gathered into
Provinces should, as soon as possible, form part of
some Provincial organization. The particular mode
of effecting this in each case must be determined by
those who are concerned.

It is sufficient for your Committee to point out
that the steps to be taken for effecting this change
are twofold, since the relations of the Dioceses in
Provincial organisation, when complete, are formed
on the one hand by the subordination of the Bishops
of the Province to a Metropolitan, and on the other
by the association of the Dioceses in Provincial
action. Any alteration of existing arrangements
would require, therefore, in the opinion of your
Committee, the concurrent action of the Diocese
which is to be gathered into a Province with other
neighbouring Dioceses, and of his Grace the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, to whom the Bishops of the
Dioceses that at present are extra-provincial have
taken the oath of canonical obedience. In the case
of the limits of an existing Province being altered,
the consent of the Synod of that Province would be
required for the alteration.

F. MONTREAL, Chairman.
H. GRAHAMSTOWN, Secretary.

130 Lambeth Conference of 1867,

G.—Report of the Committee appointed under
Resolution XI, of the Lambeth Conference!

Your Committee report that, after full considera-
tion of the questions referred to them by the
Conference, they have adopted the following Resolu-
tions :—

I. That every branch of the Church is entitled to
found a Missionary Bishopric.

II. That it is desirable that each branch of the
Church should act upon rules agreed upon before-
hand by the Synod or other Church Council of the
said branch.

III. That each Missionary Bishopric should be
deemed to be attached to one branch of the Church,
and that all rules for the election of a Missionary
‘Bishop, and for the formation of a Diocese or
Dioceses out of the Missionary District, should be
made by the Synod or other Church Council of such
branch of the Church.

IV. That notice of the erection of any Missionary
Bishopric, and the choice and consecration of the
Bishop, should be notified to all Archbishops and
Metropolitans, and all Presiding Bishops, of the
Anglican Communion,

V. That in appointing a Missionary Bishop, the
district within which he is to exercise his Mission
should be defined as far as possible; and that no
other Bishop should be sent within the same district,

Resolution XI.—“ That a Special Committee be
appointed to consider the Resolutions relative to the notifi-
cation of proposed Missionary Bishoprics, and the _ sub-
ordination of Missionaries.”

Reports of Committees, 1867. 131

without previous communication with that branch of
the Church which gave mission for the work.

VI. That, while peculiar cases may occur in
Missionary work, owing to difference of race and
language, in which it may be desirable that more
than one Bishop should exercise episcopal functions
within the same district, the Committee consider
that such cases should be regarded as exceptions, ”
justified only by special circumstances. 7

VII. That, with respect to the special case of
Continental Chaplaincies, the Committee suggest to
the Conference the consideration of: some ecclesi-
astical arrangement by which the various congrega-
tions of the Anglican Communion may be under
one authority, whether of the English or American
Church.

VIII. That the conditions on which a Missionary
Bishopric should be brought within a Provincial
organisation should be :—

1. The request of the Missionary Bishop, ad-
dressed both to the Church from which he received
mission and to the Province which he wishes to join.

2. The consent of the Church from which he
received mission, that consent being given by the
Metropolitan or Presiding Bishop.

3. The consent of the Province he wishes to
join, that consent being given by the Provincial
Synod.

IX. That the status, jurisdiction, and designation
of the Bishop thus received into a system of Pro-
vincial organisation should be determined by the
Synod of the Province to which his Bishopric shall
be then attached.

X. That, as a general rule, it is expedient that
such Missionary Bishopric should be attached to
the nearest Province; but that in certain cases it
may be necessary that some more remote Province
should be selected.

Bishop Tozer’s Mission is a case to which the

132 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Committee desire to draw the attention of the Con-
ference, as being one in which, for the present,
Provincial organization would seem to be imprac-
ticable, from the isolation of the district in which
Bishop Tozer exercises his episcopal functions, and
its remoteness from the Province of South Africa.

XI. That Missionary Bishops and their Clergy
should be bound generally to the Canons of Doctrine
and Discipline of the Church from which their
mission is derived, or to which they may have
been united, and that all alterations in matters of
discipline be communicated toe the authorities of
that Church.

XII. That when a Missionary Church shall be
received into the organisation of a Provincial Synod,
the said Church should be bound by the acts-of that
body; but that, in order to effect this, the Missionary
Church should be granted a power of representation,
or of vote by proxy, in such Synod.

XIII. That, as a general rule, in conformity with
Church order, ‘all Missionaries and Chaplains residing
or engaged in the exercise of ministerial duty within
the Diocese or District of a Colonial or Missionary
Bishop, should be licensed by, and be subject to the
authority of, the said Bishop.

XIV. That every Clergyman removing from one
Colonial or Missionary Diocese or District into
another Diocese ought to carry with him Letters
Testimonial from the Colonial or Missionary Bishop
whose Diocese or District he is leaving.

XV. That no person admitted to Holy Orders by
the Bishop of any Diocese-in England or Ireland,
who shall afterwards have been serving under the
jurisdiction of any Scottish, Colonial, or Foreign
Bishop, should be received into any of the Home
Dioceses, without: producing letters Dimissory or
Commendatory from the Scottish, Colonial, or Foreign
Bishop in whose Diocese he has been serving.

XVI. The attention of this Committee has been

Reports of Committees, 1867. 133

called to the clause in the Paper of Arrangements.
for the Conference, headed “ Subordination of Mis-
sionaries.” —The Committee have failed to understand
what is meant by the words “ instructions from those
in authority at home,” but they can recommend no
scheme which interferes with the canonical relation
which subsists between a Bishop and his clergy.

W. J. GIBRALTAR, Chairman.

WILLIAM GEORGE TOZER,
Missionary Bishop, Secretary.

H.—Report of the Committee appointed under
Resolution VI, of the Lambeth Conference.

By the Resolution of the Lambeth Conference
two questions were referred to the Committee :—

I. How the Church may be delivered from a con-
tinuance of the scandal now existing in Natal?

II. How the true faith may be maintained ?

I. On the first question, the Committee recom-
mend that an Address be made to the Colonial

1 Resolution VI.—‘ That, in the judgment of the Bishops
now assembled, the whole Anglican Communion is deeply
injured by the present condition of the Church in Natal: and
that a Committee be now appointed at this General Meeting
to report on the best mode by which the Church may be
delivered from a continuance of this scandal, and the true
faith maintained. That such Report shall be forwarded to his
Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, with the request
that he will be pleased to transmit the same to all the Bishops
of the Anglican Communion, and to ask for their judgment
thereupon.” .

134 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Bishoprics Council, calling their attention to the
fact that they are paying an annual stipend to a
Bishop lying under the imputation of heretical
teaching, and praying them to take the best legal
opinion as to there being any, and if so what,
mode of laying these allegations before some com-
petent court, and if any mode be pointed out, then to
proceed accordingly for the removal of this scandal.

The Committee also recommend that the Address
to the Colonial Bishoprics Council be prefaced with
the following statement :—

“That, whilst we accept the spiritual validity of
the sentence of deposition pronounced by the Metro-
politan and Bishops of the South African Church .
upon Dr. Colenso, we consider it of the utmost
moment for removing the existing scandal from the
English Communion that there should be pronounced
by some competent English court such a legal sen-
tence on the errors of the said Dr. Colenso as would
warrant the Colonial Bishoprics Council in ceasing
to pay his stipend, and would justify an appeal to
the Crown to cancel his Letters Patent.”

II. On the second question :

“How the true faith may be maintained in Natal?”

The Committee submit the following Report :—

That they did not consider themselves instructed
by the Conference, and therefore did not consider
themselves competent, to inquire into the whole
case; but that their conclusions are based upon the
following facts :—

1. That in the year 1863, forty-one Bishops con-
curred in an Address to Bishop Colenso, urging him
to resign his Bishopric.

2. That in the year 1863, some of the publications
of Dr. Colenso, viz.—‘ The Pentateuch and Book of
Joshua critically examined,” Parts I. and II., were
condemned by the Convocation of the Province of
Canterbury.”

3. That the Bishop of Capetown, by virtue of his

Reports of Committees, 1867. 135

Letters Patent as Metropolitan, might have visited
Dr. Colenso with summary jurisdiction, and might
have taken out of his hands the management of the
Diocese of Natal.

4. That the Bishop of Capetown, instead of pro-
ceeding summarily, instituted judicial proceedings,
having reason to believe himself to be competent
to do so.

That he summoned Dr. Colenso before himself
and suffragans. |

That Dr. Colenso appeared by his proctor.

That his defence was heard and judged to be
insufficient to purge him from the heresy.

That, after sentence was pronounced, Dr. Colenso
was offered an appeal to the Archbishop of Canter-
bury, as provided in the Metropolitan’s Letters
Patent.

5. That this Act of the African Church was
approved—

By the Convocation of Canterbury ;

By the Convocation of York ;

By the General Convention of the Episcopal
Church in the United States, in 1865 ;

By the Episcopal Synod of the Church in Scotland;

By the Provincial Synod of the Church in Canada,
in the year 1865 ;

And, finally, the spiritual validity of the sentence
of. deposition was accepted by f/ty-szx Bishops on
the occasion of the Lambeth Conference.

Judging, therefore, that the See is spiritually
vacant; and learning, by the evidence brought
before them, that there are many members of the
Church who are unable to accept the ministrations
of Dr. Colenso, the Committee deem it to be the
duty of the Metropolitan and other Bishops of South
Africa to proceed, upon the election of the Clergy
and Laity in Natal, to consecate one to discharge
those spiritual functions of which these members of
the Church are now in want. —

136 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

In forwarding their Report to his Grace the Lord
Archbishop of Canterbury, as instructed by the Re-
solution of the Conference, the Committee request
his Grace to communicate the same to the adjourned
meeting of the Conference, to be holden at Lambeth
on the tenth day of the present month.

G. A. NEW ZEALAND,
December 9th, 1867. Convener.

J.—Form of Letters Dimissory for the Clergy.

To the Right Reverend the Bishops and Reverend
the Clergy, and to the faithful in Christ of the
Diocese of A. We, B, by Divine permission Bishop
of C, send greeting in the Lord.

We commend to your brotherly kindness by these
our letters, D, E, Priest (or Deacon) of our Diocese,
beseeching you to receive him in the Lord as a
brother sound in the Faith, of a well-ordered and
Religious Life, and worthy of all Christian Fellow-
ship, and to render him any assistance of which he
may stand in need; and so we bid you farewell in
Christ our Lord

Witness our hand.

A, Bishop.
B, Secretary:

No. XIII. (See page 19.)

Resolutions of the Adjourned Conference, Dec. 10, 1867.

Resolution I—* That this adjourned meeting of
the Conference receives the Report (No. I.) of the
Committee now presented, and directs the publica-

Adjourned Conference, Dec. 10, 1867. 137

tion thereof, commending it to the careful conside-
ration of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion,
as containing the result of the deliberations of that
Committee; and returns the members of the same
its thanks for the care with which they have con-
sidered the various important: questions referred to
them.” i

(The same Resolution was passed with reference
to Reports ᾿ς III, 1V., V., VI., VIL)

Resolution II.—‘ That the Report (No. VIII.)
of the Committee appointed under Resolution VI,
laid before this meeting by his Grace the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury be received and printed ; that
the thanks of this Meeting be given to the Com-
mittee for their labours; and that his Grace be re-
quested to communicate the Report to the Council
of the Colonial Bishoprics Fund.”

Resolution III.—* That his Grace be requested, if
applied to by the House of Bishops in the Episcopal
Church in the United States of America, to allow a
copy of the Records of the Conference to be made
for them, and to be lodged in the hands of such
officer as shall be designated by the House of Bishops
to receive it, for reference by Bishops only, but not
for publication.”

Resolution IV.“ That his Grace the Archbishop
of Canterbury be requested to convey to the Church
in Russia an expression of the sympathy of the
Anglican Communion with that Church, in the loss
which it has sustained by the death of his Eminence
Philarete, the venerable Metropolitan of Moscow.”

Resolution V.-“ That the thanks of this Confer-
ence be given to the Bishop of Grahamstown for the
valuable services which he has rendered as Secretary
to many of the Committees appointed by the Con-
ference.”

Resolution VI.—* That the thanks of this Confer-
ence be given to Philip Wright, Esq.,and to Isambard
Brunel, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, for their aid as

138 Lambeth Conference of 1867.

Assistant Secretaries to the Committees ; and espe-
cially to the latter for his valuable assistance in all
matters that required legal advice.”

Resolution VII.—*‘ That we cannot close this
Conference without conveying our hearty thanks to
his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, both for
convening this meeting, and for the mode in which
he has presided over its deliberations.”

Besides the preceding Resolutions,—

The President reported that he had been authorised
to annex the following signatures to the Encyclical
Letter :—

Ax: T. ‘CAGESTR.

AUCKLAND, BATH AND WELLS.
ROBERT DOWN AND CONNOR.
WILLIAM DERRY.

EDWARD NEWFOUNDLAND.

J. FREDERICTON.

T. E. ST. HELENA.

2. The following Bishops were appointed as a Sub-
Committee, for the purpose of drawing up a Bill, in
accordance with a Report submitted by the Com-
mittee appointed under Resolution IX. of the previous
meeting :—

BISHOP OF LONDON.
OXFORD.
LINCOLN.
ELY.
LICHFIELD (Elect).
MONTREAL.
Ἢ GRAHAMSTOWN.
BISHOP TROWER.

3. His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury laid
on the table a form of Letters Dimissory,! which he
had prepared, in accordance with Resolution II. of
the last session of the Lambeth Conference.

2 J. page 136.

Canadian and West Indian Addresses. 139

4. The Bishop of Illinois, at the request of the
Conference, stated that the Meeting of the Triennial
General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States would be held onthe
first Wednesday of October next, in the City of New
York ; and, in behalf of the Church in the United
States, offered an affectionate invitation to the
Bishops of the Conference to be present on that
occasion ; and also expressed the hope that the dif-
ferent branches of the Anglican Communion would
depute one or more Bishops as Representatives of
the Mother and Colonial Churches, to be present on
that occasion, assuring all that might accept this
invitation of cordial welcome and affectionate brother-
hood.

5. At the request of the Conference, the Bishop
of Lichfield (Elect) undertook the office of Corre-
sponding Secretary for the Bishops of the Anglican
Communion.

His Grace the President then pronounced the
Benediction, and the Conference was closed.

No. XIV. (See page 21.)

Addresses from the Canadian and West Indian Houses
of bishops. 1872 and 1873.

I. To his Grace the President and their Lordships
the Bishops of the Upper House of Convocation
of Canterbury—

We, the Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of
Canada, availing ourselves of the opportunity afforded
by the meeting of a special Provincial Synod, desire
that the following Address, touching the Lambeth

K 2

140 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

Conference, be forwarded to his Grace, the President,
and to the Prolocutor of the Lower House of Con-
vocation of the Province of Canterbury.

We, the Bishops aforesaid, encouraged by the
successful results of the Address presented to his
Grace the late Archbishop of Canterbury, by the
Provincial Synod of Canada, whereby the Lambeth
Conference was convened, humbly and earnestly
petition that the Convocation of Canterbury will take
such action as may seem most expedient to unite
with us in requesting the Archbishop of Canterbury
to summon a second meeting of the Conference.

We are persuaded that such meeting will be most
efficacious in uniting the scattered branches of the
Anglican Communion, and in promoting the exten-
sion of the Kingdom of Christ throughout the world;
and we therefore pray that it may be again convened
at the earliest day that may suit the convenience of
the Archbishop of Canterbury.

A. MONTREAL (Metropolitan).
J. T. ONTARIO.

J. W. QUEBEC.

A. H. TORONTO.

J. HURON.

Montreal, Dec. 13, 1872.

2. “The West Indian Bishops [assembled at
Georgetown, Demerara, in 1873] join in the request
lately made to the Archbishop of Canterbury by the
Bishops of the Canadian Province, that he would
summon another meeting of the Bishops of the
Anglican Communion throughout the world at as
early a date as may seem to his Grace practicable
and expedient.”

Correspondence with American Church. 141

No. XV. (See page 21.)

Correspondence between Bishops of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the United States and the
Archbishop of Canterbury. 1874 and 1875.

1. The Archbishop of Canterbury to Bishop Kerfoot,
of Pittsburgh.

ADDINGTON PARK, CROYDON, Aug. 21, 1874.
My DEAR BISHOP,

Before you leave England, I wish to say
to you that the subject of another gathering of
Bishops of our Communion at Lambeth has been
much talked of lately. If the House of Bishops of
your Church were to express their wishes on this
subject, it might help me in bringing the matter
before my brethren of this country when we meet in
January of next year.

Trusting that God will bless you in your journey
and on your return to your work,

I am, your faithful Brother,
A. C. CANTUAR,

2. The Bishop of Pittsburgh to the Archbishop of
Canterbury.

HousE ΟΕ BisHors, New York, δου. 3, 1874.
My DEAR Lorp,

I had the pleasure not long since of
writing to you from this House, to say that the
request to your Grace to invite another Lambeth
Conference had been signed by forty-three of the

[42 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

forty-six Bishops in attendance. I then said that I
would write again fully when the engagements of
the General Convention allowed me to do so.

The matter was introduced by me into this House
early in our session, so that the Lord Bishop of
Lichfield, who was with us for the first week of the
Convention, might speak to the Bishops on the
subject. He did this with great discretion and effect
in our House, and also in the House of Deputies.
While the Bishops generally were very favourably
disposed towards the proposal (and your Grace’s note
to me of August 25th very much promoted this
inclination), some of them wished that any action of
the Bishops should be preceded by some expression
from the clerical and lay deputies that would prevent
any thought that the Bishops were acting for them-
selves alone, and not also for and with the clergy
ain, laity. 0.5/3 It was deemed by all the Bishops
to be sufficient, and for several reasons best, that we
should express our wish and convey our request to
your Grace in the form in which it has by this
time reached you through the Bishop of Lichfield.
The Bishop of New York and myself prepared the
paper, and received the signatures of the Bishops
individually. As some of the signatures may not be
readily legible, I enclose a printed list of the names
of the signers.

It clearly appeared in the consultations of the
deputies, and even of the Bishops, that there were
not a few misconceptions about the Conference of
1867. This, 1 think, was due, in large measure, to
the misrepresentation of its character and manage-
ment in the memoir of the late Bishop Hopkins... .
Bishop Hopkins himself would not, I am sure, have
approved of the sketch of the Lambeth Conference
given by his biographer. But its effects were seen,
and I hope counteracted, in the discussions.

In the consultation of the Bishops, the wish was
several times expressed that the arrangements for a

Correspondence with American Church. 143

Conference in 1876 should be such as to manifest
that the variety of the topics admitted, and the time
allowed, should be such as would seem to justify a
Convocation of our Bishops from all over the world.
There was no wish to annex terms or conditions to
our request to your Grace. The suggestions already
made by the Canadian Synod (whose action on this
subject was recited in our House of Bishops) covers
most or all of this ground.! As our consultations
went on, it seemed to be devolved on me, by general
consent, to make to you this informal communication
about such wishes. Two or three Bishops gave them
to me in writing ; some others in unwritten words.
The thoughts were that the Bishops attending the
Conference might propose for discussion such ques-
tions as each one should deem right; and that the
sessions should be continued long enough to allow
of the needful Conferences. Those of us who were
at Lambeth seven years ago knew quite well that
such were the real character and spirit of that Con-
ference; but that it being then an enterprise and
experiment at once novel and anxious, precautions
were rightly taken and limitations wisely observed
that persons at a distance could not fully or fairly
comprehend. The invitation was even then given
in advance to the Bishops to suggest topics ; and
many of us did this, and I believe every such topic
was introduced.

I made such answers to the inquiries of some of my
brethren, adding that, of course, as then, so whenever
we should meet again, no topic should be introduced
which must elicit discussions on the State relations
of the Church of England. All the Bishops here at
once recognise this as the right rule. I said this was
the only real limitation I witnessed seven years ago.
I ventured to anticipate that on this point every
reasonable wish would be satisfied in the future
Conference.

* See below, page 148.

144 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

In thus writing at, I hope, not a needless length to
your Grace, I think that I quite fulfil the promises
made to some of my American brethren, who united
heartily in the request sent to you, and I hope that I
also convey such intimations as will entirely meet
your own views in your anticipation of any such
Conference. I may also add that the careful con-
sideration given to the whole scheme here of late
only confirms our convictions of the wisdom and
usefulness of the renewal of the Conference of 1867.
I am, my dear Lord Archbishop, your Grace’s very
faithful and affectionate brother.

JOHN B. KERFOOT,
Bishop of Pittsburgh.

3. The following zs the formal Resolution referred to
in the foregoing letter.

The undersigned Bishops of the Protestant Epis-
copal Church in the United States, having had the
pleasure of listening to the statements of the Right
Reverend the Lord Bishop of Lichfield, of the Right
Reverend the Lord Bishop of Montreal and Metro-
politan, of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of
Kingston, Jamaica, and of the Right Reverend the
Lord Bishop of Quebec in reference to the benefits
to the whole Anglican Communion to be derived
from the holding of another Conference of the
Bishops thereof, do most cordially express in their
individual capacity their interest in the subject, and
their hope that his Grace the Archbishop of Canter-
bury will find it consistent with his views of duty to
take steps towards the assembling of such a Con-
ference.

[The signatures of forty-two Bishops, including
the presiding Bishop, are appended. ]

Correspondence with American Church. 145

4. The Archbishop of Canterbury to the Bishop of
Pittsburgh.

, LAMBETH PALACE, S.W.,
April 27, 1875.
[PRIVATE.]

My DEAR BISHOP,

As I promised, I brought the question of a second
Lambeth Conference and your kind letter before the
Bishops of the Southern Province, who met lately in
Convocation.

The holding of such a Conference in the autumn
of next year is rendered impossible, if not by other
causes, by the fact that I find that 1876 is the year
in which I must (D.v.) hold my visitation in the
autumn, and deliver my charge, and you will under-
stand the impossibility of my undertaking at that
time the additional work necessarily involved on so
important an occasion as the reassembling of the
Lambeth Conference.

We cannot, therefore, look forward to the Con-
ference taking place earlier than 1877, which will be
ten years from the time of the first meeting. But,
as we know that your Convention meets in the
autumn of that year, it appears to us that the
Lambeth Conference might well be in the spring
of 1877, thus leaving time for our American brethren
to return home before this Convention.

I think I ought to add that there was a general
impression that, before steps were taken for gathering
Bishops from all parts of the world, we ought dis-
tinctly to understand what the subjects are on which
discussion is desirable. There was a general feeling
that matters of doctrine which are already settled by
our formularies could not be re-opened, and matters
of discipline must be left to the authorities of each
separate Church. There remains, therefore, only
such general questions as relate to the intercourse

146 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

of the various branches of our Church, and that
brotherly conference which was on former occasions
found so valuable.

I write this private letter, as I think you may wish
to know the feelings of the English Bishops on this
important subject with as little delay as possible, and
I hope before long to be able to return a formal
answer to the document signed by the Bishops of
the American Episcopal Church.

Believe me to be, my dear Bishop,
Very sincerely yours,

AL CANTUAR.

5. Zo the Right Rev. the Bishops of the Protestant
Episcopal Church of the United States of

America.
LAMBETH PALACE, S.E.,

June 7, 1875.
RIGHT REV. AND DEAR BRETHREN,

I have laid before my brethren of the Province of
Canterbury your letter on the subject of holding a
second Lambeth Conference, and I have had com-
munication on the same subject with the Archbishop
of York, as representing the Bishops of the Northern
Province.

We entertain a grateful sense of the advantages of
that brotherly intercourse which the last Lambeth
Conference tended to encourage, and we should look
forward with much pleasure to another meeting of
the same kind.

I am, however, instructed by my brethren to bring
before you the two following considerations, re-
specting which I should be glad to have your
opinion before taking any further steps in this
matter. :

1. It seems to my brethren and myself that such a

Correspondence with American Church. 147

Conference could not with advantage be held till the
tenth year after the last meeting. I am aware that
this would bring us to the year 1877, in which, as I
understand, your general convention holds its triennial
meeting ; but the autumn of 1876, which has been
mentioned by the Bishop of Lichfield as a suitable
time, will, so far as I can foresee, be entirely occupied
by my visitation of the Archdiocese of Canterbury,
and it is the opinion of those whom I have consulted
that the most convenient time would be the summer
of 1877, say, in the month of July, which time would
enable our brethren of the United States to return
home for the meeting of their own Convention.

2. I have also been requested to bring before you
the following point. You will at once see that I
ought not to take the step of inviting so large a body
of Bishops to leave the scene of their labours in their
distant Dioceses without being able to state to them
somewhat explicitly what the practical results are
which are expected to be derived from the Con-
ference.

It appears to us that, respecting matters of doctrine,
no change can be proposed or discussed, and that no
authoritative explanation of doctrine ought to be
taken in hand. Each Church is naturally guided in
the interpretation of its formularies by its recognised
authorities. Again, respecting matters of discipline,
each Church has its own appointed Courts for the
administration of its ecclesiastical law, with which,
of course, such a meeting of Bishops as is proposed
claims no power to interfere. The present state of
the Christian Church makes men more than usually
sensitive as to any appearance even of a claim on the
part of any one branch of the Church to interfere
with the decisions or administrations of another.
Each is considered qualified to regulate its own
separate affairs, while all are united in the mainte-
nance of the one faith. Therefore, if the Conference
meets, it will be necessary to exclude all questions

148 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

which might happen to trench on the complete
independence of the several branches of the Church.

The propriety of the Bishops meeting in Con-
ference must depend, I conceive, upon this—whether
there appear a sufficient number of subjects relating
to the brotherly intercourse of the various Branches
of the Anglican Communion, on which a conference
of the chief Ministers of the several Churches would
be likely to throw light.

I should be greatly obliged for any communica-
tion which you may be disposed to send to me,
during the next six months, as to your views on the
general desirableness of our meeting under such
circumstances as I have described. I will take care,
before the close of the present year, to lay before my
brethren in England any statement I receive as to
the particular questions which you think it desirable
for the Bishops of the Anglican Communion to
consider.

This would enable us to come to a decision re-
specting the Conference, and make any arrangements
that may be required.

I remain,
Your faithful brother and servant in Christ,

A. C. CANTUAR.

No. XVI. (See page 22.)
Memorandum of the Canadian House of Bishops. 1874.

Suggestions of the Canadian House of Bishops
made to the Bishop of Lichfield concerning the
Lambeth Conference.

1. As to the period of its meeting—

We would suggest that 1876 would be a period
very convenient and welcome to the Church in
Canada.

Canadian Bishops Memorandum. 149

2. As to the duration of the Conference—

We are of opinion that there should be a con-
tinuous Session of one month, four days in each
week being days of session ; or,

That there should be at least two weeks of Session,
with an interval between the first and last week.

3. As to the matter to be discussed—

We feel that it is most desirable that the Reports
of Committees laid before the Conference of 1867
should be carefully considered, with the exception of
Report No. 8.

4. We think that it would be very convenient
to the Bishops invited to the Congress that an
opportunity should be given them of suggesting
beforehand any subject which they may wish: to
have considered.

5. We feel that, if his Grace should be pleased to
grant the Bishops an opportunity of assembling
in Conference, it would be extremely desirable that
his decision on the above matters should be embodied
in the Circular of Invitation.

Signed, on behalf of the Bishops of the Province
of Canada,

A. MONTREAL, Metropolitan.

No. XVII. (See page 24.

Action of the Convocations of Canterbury and York

with reference to the proposed Second Lambeth
Conference.

The Memorials from the Canadian and West
Indian Bishops (quoted above, No. XVI, page 148),
were on April 29, 1874, referred by the Upper House

150 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

of the Convocation of Canterbury to a Joint Com-
mittee of fifteen members, who, on July 10, 1874,
presented a report in the shape of the following four
Resolutions :—

1.. “ That the relation of his Grace the Lord Arch-
bishop of Canterbury to the other Bishops of the
Anglican Communion be that of Primate among
Archbishops, Primates, Metropolitans, and Bishops.”

2. “That in accordance with the Memorial of the
Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Canada,
and the resolution of the Bishops of the West Indian
Dioceses, his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canter-
bury be requested to convene a General Conference
of the Bishops of the Anglican Communion to carry
on the work begun by the Lambeth Conference in
1867.

3. “ That the Reports of Committees presented at
the adjourned Session of the Lambeth Conference in
1867, but not adopted or even discussed, be taken
into consideration at the Second Conference.”

4. “That the Committee recommend that his
Grace be respectfully requested to convene the
second meeting of the Lambeth Conference for the
year 1876.”

“ G. A. LICHFIELD, Chairman.”

The Report was received by the Upper House,
and communicated to the Lower House, July Io,
1874.— (See Chronicle of Convocation, pp. 437-439.)

The Upper House of Canterbury Convocation had
also resolved, on April 29, 1874, to invite an expres-
sion of opinion from the Convocation of York, and
that Convocation, on February 26, 1875, passed the
following resolution :—

“That this Synod, in reply to a communication
from the Province of Canterbury, asking for an
expression of opinion upon three resolutions respect-
ing certain memorials received from the Ecclesias-

Archbishop Ταῖς Letter of Inquiry, 1876. 151

tical Province of Canada, and from the Bishops of
the West Indian Dioceses, prays that his Grace the
President will convey to his Grace the Archbishop
of Canterbury the wish of this Synod that all
necessary steps may be taken for the assembling of
a second Conference at Lambeth, but would desire
to leave all other questions involved in these resolu-
tions to be decided as may seem best to the Arch-
bishops and the bench of Bishops.”

No. XVIII. (See page 24.)

Circular Letter of Inquiry addressed by the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury to all the Anglican Bishops,
March 28, 1876.

LAMBETH PALACE, J/arch 28, 1876.

RIGHT REVEREND BROTHER,

A wish has been expressed by many Bishops of
the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United
States of America, by the Bishops of the Canadian
Dominion, and by the West Indian Bishops, that a
second Conference of our brethren should be held at
Lambeth.

Before I decide upon the important step of inviting
the Bishops of our Communion throughout the world
to assemble at Lambeth, I have thought it right,
after consultation with the Bishops of England, to
give all our brethren an opportunity of expressing
their opinion upon the expediency of convening such
a Conference at this time, and upon the choice of
the subjects which ought to engage its attention, if
it be convened,

152 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

I therefore beg leave to intimate to you our readi-
ness to hold a Conference at Lambeth in or about
the month of July, 1878, if it shall seem expedient,
after the opinions of all our brethren have been
ascertained ; and I need scarcely assure you that
your advice is earnestly desired, and will be respect-
fully considered. May I ask, for our guidance,
whether you are willing, and are likely to be able, to
attend the Conference yourself ? }

Those who were present at Lambeth in 1867
thankfully acknowledged that, through the blessing
of Almighty God, the Bishops of the various branches
of the Anglican Communion were drawn together
in closer bonds of brotherly love and sympathy.

The help and comfort which are due from the
branches of Christ’s Church to each other are more
readily rendered, and more fully each is made ac-
quainted with the wants of the rest. In this time of
religious activity and increased intercourse between
all parts of the world, there is greater need than ever
of mutual counsel amongst the Bishops of our
widely-extended Communion.

The Bishops of England, therefore, earnestly ask
you to join with them in prayer that we may all be
guided to a wise decision on this important matter,
and if it should be resolved to hold the Conference,
that its deliberations may issue in greater peace, and
strength, and energy to the whole Church of Christ.

Anxiously awaiting your answer,
I remain,
Your faithful Brother and Servant in Christ,

A. C. CANTUAR.

The Right Reverend the Bishop of .....

Archbishop Tait’s Letter of Invitation, 1877. 153

“ Covering letter” to the Metropolitans and Presiding
Bishops.

LAMBETH PALACE, S.E., Jarch 28, 1876.
My DEAR BISHOP,

After consultation with my Brethren the Bishops
of England, including the Archbishop of York, I beg
leave to address you as of :
and request you to circulate among the Bishops of
your branch of the Church the enclosed documents,
having reference to a second Lambeth Conference.

I shall feel obliged by your favouring us at your
earliest convenience with your own views on the
questions now submitted to your consideration.

I remain, your faithful brother and servant in
Christ,

A. C. CANTUAR.

No. XIX. (See page 25.)
Letter of Invitation to the Conference cf 1878.

LAMBETH PALACE, F#ly 10, 1877.

RIGHT REVEREND AND DEAR BROTHER,

It is proposed to hold a Conference of Bishops of
the Anglican Communion at this place, beginning
on Tuesday, the second day of July, Eighteen
hundred and Seventy-eight.

The Conference, it is proposed, shall extend over
four weeks ; the first week of four Sessions to be
devoted to discussions, in Conference, of the subjects
submitted for deliberation; the second and third
weeks to the consideration of these subjects in Com-
mittees ; andthe fourth week to final discussions in
Conference, and to the close of the Meeting.

' @.g., Metropolitan of Canada.
L

154 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

The subjects selected for discussion are the fol-
lowing :— |

1. The best mode of maintaining Union among the
various Churches of the Anglican Communion.

2. Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches
to which such an arrangement may be applicable.

3. The relations to each other of Missionary
Bishops and of Missionaries in various branches of
the Anglican Communion acting in the same country.

4. The position of Anglican. Chaplains and Chap-
laincies on the Continent of Europe and elsewhere.

5. Modern forms of infidelity, and the best means
of dealing with them.

6. The condition, progress, and needs of the
various Churches of the Anglican Communion.

I shall feel greatly obliged if, at your early con-
venience, you will inform me whether we may have
the pleasure of expecting your presence at the Con-
ference.

Iam, Right Reverend and dear brother, yours
faithfully in Christ,

A. C. CANTUAR.

No. XX. (See page 29).

Sermon preached by the Archbishop of York, in
Lambeth Palace Chapel, on Tuesday, July 2nd,
1878.

“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the
face, because he was to be blamed.”—Ge/. ii. 11.

This is the first rupture amongst those who’ were
to spread the knowledge of Christ throughout the
world. An Apostle withstood an Apostle to the

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 155

face, because he was to be blamed! We all re-
member the facts. No direction had been left by the
Lord as to the treatment of the Gentiles that should
believe. Did their road to the Kingdom of Heaven
conduct through the Temple? Were the Gentiles
that believed to observe the law of Moses? If not,
what advantage had the chosen people over the scum
and off-scouring of the earth ?

These questions, of vital moment, and now im-
periously demanding a solution, were left open by the
divine Founder of the Church; they were to be
decided by the light of the Holy Spirit, working in
the Church itself. Decided they were, and set at
rest for ever. But the process of doubt and struggle
may be to us the most seasonable subject of reflec-
tion. May that Holy Spirit, who has taught and
guided the Church from the first, be with us all this
day, meditating on this significant place of Holy
Writ. Amen.

It was long before the Church would accept the
plain meaning of this passage. Was it possible, then,
that two such lights of the earth could fall apart in
strife, and this about a matter of faith? What would
the outside world say against the truth of God—nay,
‘ what a@zd it say before the spectacle of such a strife ?
If the founders of the Church can thus diverge, what
is the doctrine of the Church worth?? Thus they
mocked ; and the Fathers, hard pressed, adopted the
theory of Origen, that this dispute was simulated,
was nothing but a scene got up between the two
Apostles, who had made up their minds in concert,
about the position of the Gentiles, in order that a
strong lesson of submission might be taught to the
Judaising Christians in the person of Peter himself.
It is strange that such a theory, in which an accusa-

1 Rather “he was condemned ;” whether this means “ con-
demned by the very facts,” or “ condemned by some assembly
or body of Christians” does not appear ; the former is probable.

3 Hieron., ‘‘ Ep. ad Galat.,” Pref. )

156 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

tion of base deceit on the part of both is substituted
for one of timidity on the part of one, should have
been able to attract even Jerome; against whom
Augustine rose up, and following the precedent,
“withstood him to the face” for attributing to these
Apostles a trick which would shake our faith in the
Holy Scriptures themselves ; since these hold up the
quarrel as a reality, and not as a piece of acting.

It was indeed a quarrel. On some visit to
Antioch, not, as I venture to think, after, but before,
the decision of the Council of Jerusalem on this ques-
tion, St. Peter, by eating and drinking in communion
with the Gentiles recognised their conversion and
their position as members of the Church. But then
came some from Jerusalem, where the feeling was
strong that the law should be observed. A fresh
dispute sprang up. Peter desired to avoid offence to
his own people, from Jerusalem, so he withdrew from
the Gentile converts. It was a heavy censure; it
wasa badexample. Barnabas himself was entangled
in this “hypocrisy.” A great crisis of the Church
had come, and such a desertion cut St. Paul to the
heart. His anger was great. The wrong had been
public, and so should the rebuke be. It does not
appear that he reasoned with Peter in private. On
some public occasion he withstood and rebuked him.
Not the law, but Christ,could save. Why should Peter,
who had once set himself free from the law, bind its
chains again upon other people? If salvation was to
be by the law, then Christ was dead in vain. We
have no report of this dispute ; but, whatever may
be thought of the method of treatment, it is likely
that the course taken by St. Paul did much to clear
the ground in that momentous controversy. Bar-
nabas, it is plain, must have retracted; and as for
Peter, if I am right in supposing that this event pre-
ceded the Council at Jerusalem, we know how he
regarded the Gentiles. God “ put no difference be-
tween us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.”

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 157

The grace of God, which raises men’s hearts by
degrees into conformity with the Divine image, does
not suddenly destroy the old nature. St. Peter is
still the same impulsive man who could now confess
the Christ, and now, when troubles came, deny Him ;
who could follow him bravely into danger, yet be
overcome by the gossiping remark of a girl that met
him by chance. We must not try this case by the
standard of Anglo-Saxon consistency ; we sometimes
perhaps run the risk of purchasing too dearly that
favourite virtue, at the price of zeal and ardour. We
are not naturally indulgent towards that impulsive
nature, which the great Apostle, more Jewish in this
than the Jews, derived from his race. Anxious to
please, and to be in sympathy with those about him,
he rejoiced at first in the Gentile freedom; until
those came about him who were full of prejudice
for their venerable law, its severe conditions of com-
munion, its austere separation. Let us neither praise
nor blame ; let us only say, Grace has not yet wrought
her perfect work in this Apostle’s heart.

Nor has the other great Apostle yet learned all
that the school of grace can teach him. Face to
face, before the whole Church, he rebukes and
humbles a brother, whom Christ had honoured, who
had laboured much, and turned many from darkness
to light. He quotes it asa proof of his independ-
ence amongst the Apostles, not without complacency.
All this is consistent with his bold and resolute
nature, which marched straight to its object, and
refused to swerve, either out of respect of persons or
out of fear. His steadfast resolution, that Christ
should be all in all, came from above ; his manner of
compassing it bears clear marks of his old nature.
That blessed change under the power of grace can
be perhaps more fully studied in St. Paul’s career
than anywhere else in Church history; the strong,
loving, fierce, harsh nature,—you see the faults trans-
formed to virtues, the angles rounded off, the strong

158 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

will made obedient to the bit and bridle of love ; and
yet it is the same man still. You recognise the old
features of the portrait, but it is transfigured by a
preternatural light. Again, we will not praise nor
blame ; we will rather recognise the power of the
mighty Spirit of God ; which could use for His pur-
poses the timid impulse of one man and the impatient
zeal of another, for building up the House of God ;
and at the same time could take in hand the timid
and the impatient natures alike, and give courage to
the one and softness to the other, thus building at
onetimethe great House of God and carving delicately
each living stone of which the House is compacted.

I need not expose before you, Right Reverend
Fathers, the theory of Apostolic history which has
been built chiefly on this passage. That a permanent
quarrel and schism arose from this time between the
two Apostles, lasting to the very end; that the
history of the Apostolic age is the tale of this great
struggle between the Apostle who would maintain
and the Apostle who would abolish the Mosaic law,
with the efforts made from time to time to make
peace between them; these positions have been main-
tained by Baur and others, with great ingenuity, with
wonderful exaggeration. Every page of the Gospels
is supposed to bear marks of the struggle: Acts and
Epistles are full of it. Modern criticism is as fanciful
at times as those simple folk that peopled every wood
with fays and sprites, looked for a dryad under every
leaf and a nymph in every brook, and made out in the
ordinary noises of the forest the voice of the god Pan.
Common sense will not find anything in the Gospels
that amounts even to a trace of this contention. Such
a rupture could not have happened without leaving
great marks everywhere. There are none. Luke,
the friend of St. Paul, records in his Gospel things |
that tend to St. Peter’s honour, which the other
Gospels do not quote. Silas, the companion of Paul,
was also the friend and companion of Peter. (1 Pet.

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 159

v. 12.) Lastly, when Peter writes his First Epistle to
the Churches of Asia Minor, which Paul had founded,
he says not a word to disparage the teaching of their
founder: he says, “that this is the true grace of God,
wherein ye stand.” None of these things is consis-
tent with the theory of a feud and hatred between
these two chief pillars of the Church. Critics magnify
divergent opinions into schisms; a scratch into a
gaping wound. Had those two noble natures gone
asunder, in lasting wrath, every page of Church
history would have borne loud witness to the great-
ness of their sin.

It is very common for us to look up out of our
welter of troubles, our sects, and schisms, and dispu-
tations, and to see far back in the first ages nothing
but peace ; a united Church, offering its harmonious,
universal praise, a well-drilled army, marching in
obedience to a single will, a code of faith which
always, everywhere, ail the faithful heard, and without
questioning believed. But as the student draws near,
the objects grow more distinct, the mists disperse,
the shadows separate, and fall into their places ; and
the rose-flush of the dawn ceases to conceal the true
colours of that primeval region. Then we come to
see something very different from our preconceptions,
and learn, what is indeed gladness to learn, that upon
the whole, in the old time as in the new, the Holy
Spirit sent of the Lord has wrought in the Church
in the same manner. He wasa Spirit of light and
life and comfort to the souls of men; but then, as
now, the men were enlightened, not transformed.
And the glory of God’s great work lay in this—not
that the powers, wishes, and passions of the actors
were petrified into a lifeless uniformity, and the
superseding life from heaven took their place: but
rather that, using as His instruments men so weak and
perverse, He built with them the Church of God.
To me, I do confess, it is a comfort to know that the
Church in the first age grew by the same principles

160 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

as it grows by in the nineteenth ; that the very divi-
sions amongst us have their counterparts in the age
of the Apostles, and that our disputes, like theirs, may
be but permitted struggles and aberrations of us who
are acting out God’s great commands, and that all
the while He is making perfect the circle of His
purpose, and accomplishing His Kingdom. The
Evangelists were not four scribes, inditing with
servile hands a manifesto for the new kingdom of
heaven: they were men full of the Holy Ghost,
whose task came upon them in the course of God’s
work, imposed by the march of events, yet not less
truly by the voice of God, by whom the events were
ordered. Are the Gospels less dear to you and me,
from our knowing that oral preaching must have pre-
ceded them, that other histories and treatises must
have been written, of greater and of less importance,
of which the inspired Evangelists had knowledge?
That they wrote at last on account of the spreading
of the Church, and the gradual dispersion of the Jews,
and the approaching doom of the Holy City? The
Gospels are four green branches on the growing
stem of the Church ; are they therefore less divine
to us who believe that the growth of the Church
was divine? Beneath that growing tree the thorny
branches of the old ceremonial law withered, gradu-
ally, and there were disputes like this one between
Paul and Peter, as to how and when the dead boughs
should be cleared away. But the question has been
wisely settled: it disturbs us no more, albeit the
settlement was gradual and not without strife. The
Church has grown, as all things seem to grow, by
the life within her striving to perfect itself amidst
opposing forces. So grows the acorn, pushing its
weak shoots through hard ground, and its strength
and dignity are not less that once the swinish jaws
narrowly missed devouring the mast, and the
swinish foot did actually trample it into the clay.
So grew the liberties of the English people: are they

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 161

less dear to us because they have been threatened, and
at times eclipsed in the past? So grow the mind
and spirit of a man, passing through trials and efforts,
even through falls, to the ripeness of a resolute,
tolerant, patient, helpful age. So grew the Church of
Christ ; and her’ life is not less real, less secure, if she
has passed sometimes through fears and fightings, and
the deep waters of the proud have seemed to go even
over her life. At one time Athanasius has had to stand
against a world; at another a Hildebrand imperils
the Church by making it the supreme Kingdom
amongst the earthly kingdoms. Worldly motives are
said to have tainted the reformation of religion in this
country ; and it is true. So much the greater is our
reason for blessing God, that the sweet honeycomb has
come from the lion’s carcase; that amid the strifes
and selfishness of kings, and the ignorance of peoples,
the truth passed safely. So even now the Church is
growing, and God dwelling in her gives the increase.
We seem in deadly peril : there is unbelief on one side,
and on the other that deadening system which would
hand over the conscience to the priest, and the priest
to a medieval theology, hostile to knowledge and
incapable of change. “The waves of the sea are
mighty, and rage horribly, but yet the Lord that
dwelleth on high is mightier.”

Yet there is one more lesson which the study of
the past might bring us. By the vehemence of past
disputes, nay by the bitter hatred that they have
brought in, one might think that men had lost faith
in the power of the Holy Ghost to keep safe the ark
of God upon the stormy waters. To “withstand to
the face” has been the ‘common remedy for emer-
gencies. It may be permitted us reverently to doubt
whether the pulse of divine life in the Church has
been hastened by one beat, by the violence of the
zealous, who have thought well to be angry for the
cause of God. Through strife, but not by strife,
the Church has passed upon her way. And we,

162 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

Right Reverend Fathers, meeting a second time
in conference upon the interests of that branch
of the Church, which springing from this little island,
has so spread over the earth that the sun never sets
upon her daughter Churches, we will never admit
a doubt that God is with us still. Struggle and
conflict, and even partial failure shall not convince
us that God has left us; they are the heritage of
the Church from the beginning. The faces that we
miss, and they are many, are of those that have passed
to rest ; but the very words remind us that for us
there is not rest. And whilst we are resolved to hold
fast the faith committed to us, we may endeavour in
one point to go beyond our fathers: the candour and
the charity that springs from a firm trust in the truth,
these should be our aim and special study. More than
one writer has been pleased to point out that in the
first century were three periods in which three
Apostles, Peter, Paul, and John, predominated in
succession: and they think they can trace the same
succession in the larger field of Church history,
so that the Petrine period ends at the Reformation,
and the Pauline succeeds it, whilst the time of
St. John is supposed to be beginning. There is
something fanciful in this arrangement. Yet pardon
the fancy for the truth that underlies it. And when
Peter falters, impulsive, and is inconsistent with
himself, and Paul withstands him to the face, let the
third Apostle enter on the scene, and remind us that
we can afford to use the largest charity whilst we
hold still the firmest trust. His contribution to the
eternal diapason of the Church’s faith and love shall
be this: ‘Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the
Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

_ And this commandment have we from him,
That he who loveth God love his brother also. (1 John
iv. 15, 21.)

με eR. γϑ

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 163

No. XXI. (See page 32.)

Letter of the Ricbada attending the Lambeth Conference
of 1878, including the Reports adopted by the
Conference.

CONTENTS.

Introductory ... AA. πῇ "ΝΕ ... page 164

Report of Committee on “ The tee mode of maintaining
Union among the various Churches of the Anglican
Communion” ... . 164

Report of Committee on “ Wilds Heads of icbitees
tion for Churches to which such an arrangement
may be applicable” Gi Ne wi ass re, ee

Report of Committee on “The relation to each other of
Missionary Bishops and of Missionaries of various
branches of the Anglican Communion, acting in the
same country” ... if ὶ : 174

Report of Committee on “The ἜΘ ΚΕ of ΠΕΣ ΤΗΝ
Chaplains and nee αν i on the Continent of
Europe and elsewhere”. oie Sis pane bale! LS

Report of Committee Appointed to receive questions sub-
mitted to them, in writing, by Bishops desiring the
advice of the Conference on difficulties or problems
they have met with in their several Dioceses, and to
report thereon ... i ΝΥ ‘as Δὸν Στ BO

Conclusion ἰς. δὰ τὴ, ae + a ἐπὰν 186
Notes

164 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

LETTER:

TO THE FAITHFUL IN CHRIST JESUS, GREETING—

We, Archbishops, Bishops Metropolitan, and other
Bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, in full com-
munion with the Church of England, one hundred in
number, all exercising superintendence over Dioceses,
or lawfully commissioned to exercise Episcopal func-
tions therein, assembled, many of us from the most
distant parts of the earth, at Lambeth Palace, in the
year of our Lord 1878, under the presidency of the
most reverend Archibald Campbell, by Divine Pro-
vidence Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of all
England ; after receiving, in the private Chapel of
the said Palace, the blessed Sacrament of the Lord’s
Body and Blood, and after having united in prayer
for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, have taken into
our consideration various definite questions submitted
to us affecting the condition of the Church in divers
parts of the world,

We have made these questions the subject of
serious deliberation for many days, and we now com-
mend to the faithful the conclusions which have been
adopted.

Report of Committee on the best mode of maintaining
union among the various Churches of the A nglican
Communion.

1.—In considering the best mode of maintaining
union among the various Churches of our Communion,
the Committee, first of all, recognise, with deep
thankfulness to Almighty God, the essential and
evident unity in which the Church of England and
the Churches in visible communion with her have

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 165

always been bound together! United under One
Divine Head inthe fellowship of the One Catholic
and Apostolic Church, holding the One Faith revealed
in Holy Writ, defined in the Creeds, and maintained
by the Primitive Church, receiving the same Canonical
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as con-
taining all’ things necessary to salvation—these
Churches teach the same Word of God, partake of
the same divinely-ordained Sacraments, through the
ministry of the same Apostolic orders, and worship
one God and Father through the same Lord Jesus
Christ, by the same Holy and Divine Spirit, Who is
given to those that believe, to guide them into all
truth.

2.—Together with this unity, however, there has
existed among these Churches that variety of custom,
discipline, and form of worship which necessarily
results from the exercise by each “particular or
national Church” of its right “to ordain, change, and
abolish ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained
only by man’s authority, so that all things be done
to edifying.” We gladly acknowledge that there is
at present no real ground for anxiety on account of
this diversity ; but the desire has of late been largely
felt and expressed, that some practical and efficient
methods should be adopted, in order to guard against
possible sources of disunion in the future, and at the
same time further to manifest and cherish that true
and substantial agreement which exists among these
increasingly numerous Churches.

3.—The method which first naturally suggests itselt
is that which, originating with the inspired Apostles
long served to hold all the Churches of Christ in one
undivided and visible communion. The assembling,
however, of a true General Council, such as the
Church of England has always declared her readiness
to resort to, is, in the present condition of Christen-

1 Note A, p. 187.

166 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

dom, unhappily but obviously impossible. The diffi-
culties attending the assembling of a Synod of all
the Anglican Churches, though different in character
and less serious in nature, seem to us nevertheless
too great to allow of our recommending it for present
adoption.

4.—The experiment, now twice tried, of a Con-
ference of Bishops called together by the Archbishop
of Canterbury, and meeting under his presidency,
offers at least the hope that the problem, hitherto
unsolved, of combining together for consultation
representatives of Churches so differently situated
and administered, may find, in the providential
course of events, its own solution.! Your Committee
would, on this point, venture to suggest that such
Conferences, called together from time to time by
the Archbishop of Canterbury, at the request of, or
in consultation with, the Bishops of our Communion,
might with advantage be invested in future with
somewhat larger liberty as to the initiation and
selection of subjects for discussion. For example, a
Committee might be constituted, such as should
represent, more or less completely, the several
Churches of the Anglican Communion ; and to this
Committee it might be entrusted to draw up, after
receiving communications from the Bishops, a scheme
of subjects to be discussed.

5.—Meanwhile, there are certain principles of
Church order which, your Committee consider, ought
to be distinctly recognized and set forth, as of great
importance for the maintenance of union ah oe the
Churches of our Communion.

(1.) First, that the duly-certified action of every
national or particular Church, and of each ecclesias-
tical Province (or Diocese not included in a Province),
in the exercise of its own discipline, should be |

‘ Note B, p 188.

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 167

respected by all the other Churches, and by their
individual members.

(2.) Secondly, that when a Diocese, or territorial
sphere of administration, has been constituted by the
authority of any Church or Province of this Com-
munion within its own limits, no Bishop or other
Clergyman of any other Church should exercise his
functions within that Diocese without the consent of
the Bishop thereof: |

(3.) Thirdly, that no Bishop should authorize to
officiate in his Diocese a clergyman coming from
another Church or Province, unless such Clergyman
present letters testimonial, countersigned by the
Bishop of the Diocese from which he comes ; such
letters to be, as nearly as possible, in the form
adopted by such Church or Province in the case of
the transfer of a clergyman from one Diocese to
another.

Passing to details, your Committee would call
attention to the following points :—

L—Of Church Organisation.

6.—Inasmuch as the sufficient and effective organ-
ization of the several parts of the Church tends to
promote the unity of the whole, your Committee
would, with this view, repeat the recommendation
in the sixth report of the first Lambeth Conference,’
that those Dioceses which still remain isolated should,
as circumstances may allow, associate themselves into
a Province or Provinces, in accordance with the
ancient laws and usages of the Catholic Church.

1 This does not refer to .questions respecting missionary
Bishops and foreign chaplaincies, which have been entrusted
to other Committees.

3 Note C, p. 191.

168 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

11.—Of Common Work.

7,—Believing that the unity of our Churches will
be especially manifested and strengthened by their
uniting together in common work, your Committee
would call attention to the great value of such
co-operation wherever the opportunity shall present
itself ; as, for example, in founding and maintaining,
in the missionary fields, schools for the training of a
native ministry, such as that which is now contem-
plated in Shanghai, and, generally, as far as may be
possible, in prosecuting missionary work, such as
that which the Churches in England and Scotland
are maintaining together in Kaffraria.

11.—Of Commendatory Letters.

8—(1.) This Committee would renew the recom-
mendation of the first Lambeth Conference, that
letters commendatory should be given by their own
Bishops to clergymen visiting for a time other
Churches than those to which they belong.

(2). They would urge yet more emphatically the
importance of letters. commendatory being given by
their own clergymen to members of their flocks
going from one country to another. And they con-
sider it desirable that the clergy should urge on such
persons the duty of promptly presenting these
letters, and should carefully instruct them as to the
oneness of the Church in its Apostolical constitution
under its varying organization and conditions.

It may not, perhaps, be considered foreign to this
subject to suggest here the importance of impressing
upon our people the extent and geographical dis-
tribution of our Churches, and of reminding them
that there is now hardly any part of the world where
members of our Communion may not find a Church
one with their own in faith, order, and worship.

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 169

1V.—Of circulating Information as to the Churches.

9.—It appears that the want has been much felt
of some centre of communication among the
Churches in England, Ireland, Scotland, America,
India, the Colonies, and elsewhere, through which
ecclesiastical documents of importance might be
mutually circulated, and in which copies of them
might be retained for reference. Your Committee
would suggest that the Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge might be requested to maintain
a department for this purpose, supported by special
contributions ; and also that provision might be made
for the more general dissemination in each Church
of information respecting the acts and current history
of all the rest. They recommend that the Reports
and other proceedings of this Conference, which it
may think fit to publish, should be communicated
through this channel. They further think it desi-
rable that the official acts, and other published
documents of each representative body of this Com-
munion, should be interchanged among the respective
Bishops and the officers of such bodies.

v.—Of a Day of Intercession,

10.—Remembering the blessing promised to united
intercession, and believing that such intercession
ever tends to deepen and strengthen that unity of
His Church for which Our Lord earnestly pleaded
in His great intercessory prayer, your Committee
trust that this Conference will give the weight of its
recommendation to the observance throughout the
Churches of this Communion of a season of prayer
for the unity of Christendom. This recommendation
has been, to some extent, anticipated by the practice
adopted of late years of setting apart a Day of |
Intercession for Missions. Your Committee would

170 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

by no means wish to interfere with an observance
which appears to have been widely accepted, and
signally blessed of God. But, as our Divine Lord
has so closely connected the unity of His followers
with the world’s belief in His own Mission from the
Father, it seems to us that intercessions for the
enlargement of His Kingdom may well be joined
with earnest prayer that all who profess faith in Him
may be one flock under one Shepherd. With respect
to the day, your Committee have been informed that
the Festival of St. Andrew, hitherto observed as the
Day of Intercession for Missions, is found to be
unsuitable to the circumstances of the Church in
many parts of the world. They, therefore, venture
to suggest that, after the present year, the time
selected should be the Tuesday before Ascension
Day (being a Rogation Day), or any of the seven
days after that Tuesday; and they hope that all
the Bishops of the several Churches will commend
this observance to their respective Dioceses.

vi.i—Of Diversities in Worship.

11—Your Committee, believing that, next to
oneness in “the Faith once delivered to the saints,”
communion in worship is the link which most firmly
binds together bodies of Christian men, and remem-
bering that the book of Common Prayer, retained as
it is, with some modifications, by all our Churches,
has been one principal bond of union among them,
desire to call attention to the fact that such com-
munion in worship may be endangered by excessive
diversities of ritual. They believe that the internal
unity of the several Churches will help greatly to the
union of these one with another. And, while they
consider that such large elasticity in the forms of
worship is desirable as will give wide scope to all
legitimate expressions of devotional feeling, they

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 171

would appeal, on the other hand, to the Apostolic
precept that “all things be done unto edifying,” and
to the Catholic principle that order and obedience,
even at the sacrifice of personal preferences and
tastes, lie at the foundation of Christian unity, and
are even essential to the successful maintenance of
the Faith.

12.—They cannot leave this subject without ex-
pressing an earnest hope that Churchmen of all
views, however varying, will recognise the duty of
submitting themselves, for conscience sake, in matters
ritual and ceremonial, to the authoritative judgments
of that particular or national Church in which, by
God’s Providence, they may be placed; and that
they will abstain from all that tends to estrangement
or irritation, and will rather daily and fervently pray
that the Holy Spirit may guide every member of the
Church to “think and do always such things as be
rightful,’ and that He may unite us all in that
brotherly charity which is “the very bond of peace
and of all virtues,”

Report of Committee on Voluntary Boards of Arbi-
tration for Churches to which such an arrangement
may be applicable.

1.—Your Committee beg to submit the following
Report :— |

2.—The necessity for considering the subject
which is entrusted to your Committee—namely,
Voluntary Boards of Arbitration for Churches to
which such an arrangement may be applicable—has
arisen from the fact that there is no appeal from the
Ecclesiastical Tribunals in the Colonial Churches to
any of the ordinary Ecclesiastical Courts of England,
or to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
when advising Her Majesty on appeals from Eccle-
siastical Courts. No questions relating to the exer-

M 2

172 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

cise of discipline in a Colonial Church can come
before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council,
except on appeal from Civil Courts in the colony,
exercising jurisdiction in matters affecting property
or civil rights. The subject, therefore, before your
Committee is not the constitution or jurisdiction of
Provincial or Diocesan tribunals, but whether there
should be some external tribunals or “ Voluntary
Boards of Arbitration” to which an appeal or refer-
ence ought to be made; how such Boards, when
necessary, should be constituted; and under what
circumstances they should be approached.

3.—Your Committee, having taken into considera-
tion the whole question, especially with reference to
the action of some of the Colonial Churches since
1867, when a Report bearing upon this subject was
prepared by a Committee of the Lambeth Confer-
ence held in that year, would make the following
general recommendations :—

4.—I. (a) Every Ecclesiastical Province, which has
constituted for the exercise of discipline over its
clergy a tribunal for receiving appeals from its
Diocesan Courts, should be held responsible for its
own decisions in the exercise of such discipline ; and
your Committee are not prepared to recommend that
there should be any one central tribunal of appeal
from such Provincial tribunals.

5.—() If any Province is desirous that its tri-
bunals of appeal should have power to obtain, in
matters of doctrine, or of discipline involving a
question of doctrine, the opinion of some council of
reference before pronouncing sentence, your Com-
mittee consider that the conditions of such reference
must be determined by the Province itself; but that
the opinion of the council should be given on a con-
sideration of the facts of the case, sent up to it in
writing by the tribunal of appeal, and not merely on
an abstract question of doctrine.

6.—(c) In Dioceses which have not yet been com-

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 173

bined into a Province, or which may be geographically
incapable of being so combined, your Committee
recommend that appeals should lie from the Diocesan
Courts to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to be heard
by his Grace with such assistance as he may deem
best. The circumstances of each Diocese must
determine how such consensual jurisdiction could be
enforced.

7.—II. As regards the very grave question of the
trial of a Bishop, inasmuch as any tribunal, consti-
tuted for this purpose by a Province, is necessarily a
tribunal of first instance, it would, in the opinion of
your Committee, be expedient that, when any such
provisions can be introduced by voluntary compact
into the constitutions or canons of any Church, the
following conditions should be observed :—

8.—(a) When any Bishop shall have been sen-
tenced by the tribunal constituted for the trial of a
Bishop in any Ecclesiastical Province, if no Bishop
of the Province, other than the accused, shall dissent
from the judgment, there should be no appeal, pro-
vided that the case be heard by not fewer than five
Bishops, who shall be unanimous in their judgment.

9.—(d) If, in consequence of the small number of
Bishops in a Province, or from any other sufficient
cause, a tribunal of five comprovincial Bishops can-
not be formed, your Committee would suggest that
the Province should provide for the enlargement of
the tribunal by the addition of Bishops from a
neighbouring Province.

10.—(c) In the event of the Provincial tribunal
not fulfilling the conditions indicated in paragraph 8
of this Report, your Committee would suggest that,
whenever an external tribunal of appeal is not pro-
vided in the Canons of that Province, it should be
in the power of the accused Bishop, if condemned,
to require the Provincial tribunal to refer the case to
at least five Metropolitans or chief Bishops of the
Anglican Communion to be named in the said

174 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

Canons, of whom the Archbishop of Canterbury
should be one ; and that, if any three of these shall
require that the case, or any portion of it, shall be
re-heard or reviewed, it should be so re-heard or
reviewed.

11.—(d@) In cases in which an Ecclesiastical Pro-
vince desires to have a tribunal of appeal from its
Provincial tribunal for trying a Bishop, your Com-
mittee consider that such tribunal should consist of
not less than five Bishops of the Churches of the
Anglican Communion, under the presidency of the
Archbishop of Canterbury, if his Grace will consent
nti with the assistance of laymen learned in the
aw.

Report of Committee on the velation to each other of
Missionary Bishops and of Missionaries of
various branches of the Anglican Communion
acting in the same country.

1.—Your Committee beg to submit the following
Report :—
I.

2.—Your Committee have had before them the
question of providing Books of Common Prayer for
converts from heathenism, suitable to the special
wants of various countries ; and they recommend as
follows :—

3.—They think it very important that such books
should not be introduced or multiplied without proper
authority ; and, since grave inconvenience might
follow the use of different Prayer Books in the same
district, in English and American Missions, they
recommend that, whenever it is possible, one Prayer
Book only should be in use.

4.—It is expedient that Books of Common Prayer,
suitable to the needs of native congregations in
heathen countries, should be framed: that the prin-

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 175

ciples embodied in such books should be identical
with the principles embodied in the Book of Common
Prayer ; and that the deviations from the Book of
Common Prayer in point of form should only be
such as are required by the circumstances of par-
ticular churches. |

5.—In the case of heathen countries not under
English or American rule, any such book should be
approved by a Board consisting of the Bishop or
Bishops under whose authority the. book is intended
to be used, and of certain clergymen, not less than
three where possible, from the diocese or dioceses, or
district, and should then be communicated by such
Bishop or Bishops, or by the Metropolitan of the
province to which any such Bishop belongs, to a
Board in England, consisting of the Archbishops of
England and Ireland, the Bishop of London, the
Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, together
with two Bishops and four clergymen selected by
them, and also to a Board appointed by the General
Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in
the United States of America.

6.—No such book should be held to have been
authorised for use in public worship unless it have
received the sanction of these two Boards.

7.—In any Diocese of a country under English
rule all such new books, being modifications or
versions of the Book of Common Prayer, should be
submitted, after approval by local authority, to the
Board in England only.

II.

8.—Your Committee have considered the case of
Missions in countries not under English or American
rule, and they recommend as follows :—

g.—In cases where two Bishops of the Anglican
Communion are ministering in the same country, as
in China, Japan, and Western Africa at the present

176 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

time, your Committee are of opinion that under
existing circumstances each Bishop should have
control of his own clergy, and their converts and
congregations.

10.—The various Bishops in the same country
should endeavour, as members of the same Com-
munion, to keep up brotherly intercourse with each
other on the subject of their Missionary work.

11.—In countries not under English or American
rule, the English or American Church would not
ordinarily undertake to establish Dioceses with
strictly-defined territorial limits ; although either
Church might indicate the district in which it was
intended that the Missionary Bishop should labour.

12.—Bishops in the same country should take care
not to interfere in any manner with the congrega-
tions or converts of each other.

13.—It is most undesirable that either Church
should for the future send a Bishop or Missionaries
to a town or district already occupied by a Bishop
of another branch of the Anglican Communion.

14.—When it is intended to send forth any new
Missionary Bishop, notification of such an intention
should be sent beforehand to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, to the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the United States of America,
and to the Metropolitan of any Province near which
the Missionary Bishop is to minister.

III.

15.—Your Committee have had before them a
communication from the Bishop of Calcutta, dated
June 4th, 1878, containing Resolutions of the Bishops
of India and Ceylon, also a letter from Bishop Cald-
well, dated June Ist, 1878, on the subject of the
relation of Bishops abroad to the Missionaries in
their Dioceses or districts.

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 177

16.—The questions raised by the Bishop of
Calcutta’s communication relate to the power and
authority of the Bishop in respect of giving and
withdrawing the licences, Ist, of the clergy under
his charge ; 2nd, of lay readers and catechists ; also
᾿ το the rights of the Bishop in reference to changes
in the management, order of service, and place of
worship of any congregation.

17.—As regards the licensing of the clergy, it is
admitted generally that every Missionary clergyman,
whether appointed by a society or otherwise, should
receive the licence of the Bishop in whose Diocese
he is to labour; but your Committee are of opinion
that, in case of refusal to give a licence to a clergy-
man, the Bishop should, if the clergyman desire it,
state the reasons of his refusal, and transmit them
to the Metropolitan, who should have power to
decide upon their sufficiency ; such reasons should
also be accessible to the person whose licence is in
question. Where there is no Metropolitan, the
reasons should be transmitted to the Archbishop of
Canterbury, who should decide in like manner.

18.—As regards the withdrawal of a licence, your
Committee find that in some Provinces the mode of
proceeding for revocation has been fixed by canon,
and the jurisdiction thus created has been established
by consent. For these places it is not necessary to
make any recommendations. Where no such juris-
diction exists, your Committee recommend that the
Bishop should in no case proceed to the revocation
of a clergyman’s licence without affording him the
opportunity of showing cause against it, and that if
the Bishop shall afterwards proceed to revoke the
licence, he should, if the clergyman desire it, state
the reasons for his decision to such clergyman, and
also to the Metropolitan, who should have power to
sanction or disallow the revocation. In cases where
there is no Metropolitan, the Archbishop of Canter-
bury should be regarded as the Metropolitan for this

178 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

purpose. No such revocation should take place,
except for grave ecclesiastical offences.

19.—The Bishop would probably find it desirable,
where the clergyman is connected with one of the
great Missionary societies, to communicate with the
society, or its local representatives, before taking
steps for revocation of a licence.

20.—With regard to lay agents, your Committee
consider it desirable that such as are employed in
more important spiritual functions should have the
licence, or other express sanction of the Bishop ; and
that other laymen employed in Missionary work
should be considered to have the implied sanction of
the Bishop, and should not continue to be so em-
ployed, if the Bishop see fit, for a grave reason, to
forbid them.

21.—The authority of the Bishop in appointing
places for public worship has been always admitted
in the Church. Every place in which the Holy
Communion is regularly celebrated should have the
sanction of the Bishop.

22.—Your Committee have been asked for an
opinion as to Subordinate, Co-ordinate, or Suffragan
Bishops in India, to minister to native congregations,
within the limits of another Diocese. Your Com-
mittee think that there are manifest objections to
the appointment of a Bishop to minister to certain
congregations within the Diocese of another Bishop,
and wholly independent of him. Your Committee
think that, for the present, the appointment of
Assistant Bishops, whether European or native, sub-
ordinate to the Bishop of the Diocese, would meet
the special needs of India in this matter, and would
offer the best security for order and peace.

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 179

Report of Committee on the position of Anglican
Chaplains and Chaplainctes on the Continent of
Europe and elsewhere.

1.—Your Committee have to report that they have
agreed to the following recommendations :—

2.—I. That it is highly desirable that Anglican
congregations, on the Continent of Europe and else-
where, should be distinctly urged not to admit the
stated ministrations of any clergyman without the
written licence or permission of the Bishop of the
Anglican Communion who is duly authorised to
grant it; and that the occasional assistance of
strangers should not be invited or permitted without
some satisfactory evidence of their ordination and
character as clergymen.

3.—II. That it is desirable, as a general rule, that
two chapels shall not be established where one is
sufficient for the members of both Churches,
American and English; also that where there is
only one church or chapel the members of both
Churches should be represented on the Committee,
if any.

4.—II]. That it be suggested to the Societies
which partly support Continental Chaplaincies, that,
in places where English and American churchmen
reside or visit, and especially where Americans out-
number the English, it may be desirable to appoint
a properly-accredited clergyman of the American
Church.

5.—IV. That your Committee, having carefully
considered a Memorial addressed to the Archbishops
and Bishops of the Church of England by four
Priests and certain other members of “the Spanish
and Portuguese Reformed Episcopal Church,” pray-
ing for the consecration of a Bishop, cannot but
express their hearty sympathy with the Memorialists
in the difficulties of their position ; and, having heard
a statement on the subject of the proposed extension

180 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

of the Episcopate to Mexico by the American
Church, they venture to suggest that, when a Bishop
shall have been consecrated by the American Church
for Mexico, he might be induced to visit Spain and
Portugal, and render such assistance at this stage of
the movement as may seem to him practicable and
advisable.

Report of Commutice appointed to receive questions
subniitted to them, in writing, by Bishops desiring
the advice of the Conference on daifficulties or
problems they have met with in their several
Dioceses, and to report thereon.

Attention has been called to the following subjects
by questions submitted to your Committee :—

1.—The position which the Anglican Church
should assume towards the “Old Catholics” and
towards other persons on the Continent of Europe
who have renounced their allegiance to the Church of
Rome, and who are desirous of forming some con-
nection with the Anglican Church, either English or
American.

2.—Applications for intercommunion between
themselves and the Anglican Church from persons
connected with the Armenian and other Christian
communities in the East.

3.—The position of Moravian ministers within
the territorial limits of Dioceses of the Anglican
Communion.

1.—The West Indian Dioceses.
(a) Their proposed Provincial organization.
(ὁ) The position of their Diaconate.
2.—The Church of Haiti.

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 181
a

Local peculiarities regarding the Laws of Marriage.

D.
A Board of Reference for matters connected. with
Foreign Missions.
E.
Difficulties arising in the Church of England from

the revival of obsolete forms of Ritual, and from
erroneous teaching on the subject of Confession.

Vy #

The fact that a solemn protest is raised in so many
Churches and Christian communities throughout the
world against the usurpations of the See of Rome,
and against the novel doctrines promulgated by its
authority, is a subject for thankfulness to Almighty
God. All sympathy is due from the Anglican
Church to the Churches and individuals protesting
against these errors, and labouring, it may be, under
special difficulties, from the assaults of unbelief as
well as from the pretensions of Rome.

We acknowledge but one Mediator between God
and men—the Man Christ Jesus, Who is over all,
God blessed for ever. We reject, as contrary to the
Scriptures and to Catholic truth, any doctrine which
would set up other mediators in His place, or which
would take away from the Divine Majesty of the
fulness of the Godhead which dwelleth in Him, and
which gave an infinite value to the spotless Sacrifice
which He offered, once for all, on the Cross for the
sins of the whole world.

It is therefore our duty to warn the faithful that
the act done by the Bishop of Rome, in the Vatican
Council, in the year 1870—whereby he asserted a
supremacy over all men in matters both of faith and

182 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

morals, on the ground of an assumed infallibility—
was an invasion of the attributes of the Lord Jesus
Christ.

The principles on which the Church of England
has reformed itself are well known. We proclaim
the sufficiency and supremacy of the Holy Scriptures
as the ultimate rule of faith,and commend to our
people the diligent study of the same. We confess
our faith in the words of the ancient Catholic creeds.
We retain the Apostolic order of Bishops, Priests,
and Deacons. We assert the just liberties of par-
ticular or national Churches. We provide our people,
in their own tongue, with a Book of Common Prayer
and Offices for the administration of the Sacraments,
in accordance with the best and most ancient types
of Christian faith and worship. These documents
are before the world, and can be known and read of
all men. We gladly welcome every effort for reform
upon the model of the Primitive Church. We do
not demand a rigid uniformity ; we deprecate need-
less divisions; but to those who are drawn to us in
the endeavour to free themselves from the yoke of
error and superstition we are ready to offer all help,
and such privileges as may be acceptable to them
and are consistent with the maintenance of our own
principles as enunciated in our formularies.

Your Committee recommend that questions of the
class now submitted to them be dealt with in this
spirit. For the consideration, however, of any definite
cases in which advice and assistance may, from time
to time, be sought, your Committee recommend that
the Archbishops of England and Ireland, with the
Bishop of London, the Primus of the Scottish Epis-
copal Church, and the Presiding Bishop of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of
America, the Bishop superintending the congrega-
tions of the same upon the Continent of Europe, and
the Bishop of Gibraltar, together with such other
Bishops as they may associate with themselves, be

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 183

requested to advise upon such cases as circumstances
may require.

With regard to the special questions now raised
respecting Moravian Orders,! the above-mentioned
prelates are recommended to associate with them-
selves such learned persons as they may deem emi-
nently qualified to assist them by their knowledge
of the historical difficulties involved.

1.—(a) With respect to the West Indian Dioceses,
assuming such Dioceses to desire to be combined into
a Province, your Committee advise that the formal
consent of the Diocesan Representative Synods, if
free (as regards their relation to the State) to give
such consent, be first obtained.

The Bishops of the several Dioceses would then
forward such formal consent, or expressed desire, to
the Archbishop of Canterbury, requesting him to
give his sanction to the formation of the Province.

Whether the General Synod of the Province should
consist of the Bishops, with representatives of the

1 The special questions submitted were the following :—

τ Ifa Moravian presbyter or deacon desires to be received
into the Anglican Ministry, ought I to (a) ordain him abso-
lutely ; (4) reordain him conditionally ; (c) accept his orders as
valid, and simply give him mission in the Anglican Church?

“5. Can I canonically and regularly commission a Bishop of
the Unitas Fratrum in my Diocese either to confirm or to ordain
for me, or to do both Episcopal acts according to the Anglican
ritual ?

“3. Am I justified, if called on, to confirm children, or ordain
presbyters or deacons, or do both for the Moravians, in their
churches, and according to their ritual?

“4. May Anglican presbyters and deacons, with their Bishop’s
sanction, officiate and minister the sacraments in Moravian
churches, according to their ritual, and invite Moravian pres-

. byters or deacons to execute the furictions appertaining to their
office in Anglican churches, and according to Anglican ritual?”

184 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

clergy and laity of the respective Dioceses, or should
consist of the Bishops of the Province only ; and, in
the latter case, what limitation should be imposed
on the powers of such purely Episcopal Synod, is a
question which ought to be left to the Diocesan
Synods to decide, with the approval of the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury.

If the West Indian Dioceses be formed into a
Province, it seems desirable that a Metropolitan
should be, in the first instance, elected from and
by the Bishops of the West Indian Dioceses.

(4) The questions! submitted respecting the pecu-
liar circumstances of the West Indian Diaconate
appear to your Committee, upon full consideration,
to be such as can be adequately decided only in
Diocesan or Provincial Synods.

2.—Your Committee desire to express their satis-
faction on learning that a Church in connexion with
the Anglican Communion has been planted in the
island of Haiti; that a Bishop has been consecrated
thereto by Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States of America, and the
Bishop of Kingston, Jamaica; and that successful
efforts are being made for the training of a native
Ministry ; and your Committee trust that God’s
blessing may rest upon the Bishop, Priests, and
Deacons, and all other members of this Church.

‘ These questions raised the following points :—

1. The desirableness, or otherwise, of recognising a Diaco-
nate which, in certain cases, shall be practically permanent,
instead of regarding the Diaconate as the invariable step to
the Presbyterate.

2. The desirableness, or otherwise, of permitting Deacons
to engage in such secular callings as are not inconsistent with
the due and edifying discharge of sacred functions.

3. What modifications, if any, should be allowed as regards
the intellectual qualifications and tests to be required of, and
imposed on, such laymen as desire to become Deacons without
relinquishing their secular vocation.

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 185
C.

With regard to those questions in connexion with
the Laws of Marriage which have been submitted
to them, your Committee, while fully recognising the
difficulties in which various branches of the Church
have been placed by the action of local Legislatures,
are of opinion that steps should be taken by each
branch of the Church, according to its own discre-
tion, to maintain the sanctity of marriage, agreeably
to the principles set forth in the Word of God, as
the Church of Christ hath hitherto received the
Same,

With respect to what has been submitted to us on
the subject of Foreign Missions, your Committee are
of opinion that it is desirable to appoint a Board of
Reference, to advise upon questions brought before
it either by Diocesan or Missionary Bishops or by
Missionary Societies. Your Committee are further
of opinion that the details of the formation and con-
_ stitution of such Board ought to be referred to the
Archbishops of England and Ireland, the Bishop of
London, the Primus of the Scottish Episcopal
Church, the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the United States of America,
with the Bishop superintending the congregations
of the same upon the Continent of Europe, and
such other Bishops as they may associate with them-
selves, who should communicate with the authorities
of the various Colonial Churches, and with the ex-

isting Missionary Organisations of the Anglican
Communion.

Considering unhappy disputes on questions of

_ ritual, whereby divers congregations in the Church

of England and elsewhere have been seriously dis-

quieted, your Committee desire to affirm the prin-
N

186 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

ciple that no alteration from long-accustomed ritual
should be made contrary to the admonition of the
Bishop of the Diocese.

Further, having in view certain novel practices
and teachings on the subject of Confession, your
Committee desire to affirm that in the matter of
Confession the Churches of the Anglican Communion
hold fast those principles which are set forth in the
Holy Scriptures, which were professed by the Primi-
tive Church, and which were re-affirmed at the
English Reformation; and it is their deliberate
opinion that no minister of the Church is authorised
to require from those who may resort to him to open
their grief a particular or detailed enumeration of
all their sins, or to require private confession previous
to receiving the Holy Communion, or to enjoin or
even encourage the practice of habitual confession
to a Priest, or to teach that such practice of habitual
confession, or the being subject to what has been
termed the direction of a Priest, is a condition of
attaining to the highest spiritual life. At the same
time your Committee are not to be understood as
desiring to limit in any way the provision made
in the Book of Common Prayer for the relief of
troubled consciences.

These are the Reports of the Conference, and the
practical conclusions at which we have arrived.
Some of these conclusions have reference to the
special circumstances of different branches of the
One Church of Christ, according to peculiarities of
their various Missionary work for the heathen, or
their labours amongst their own people ; some em-
body principles which apply to all branches of the
Church Universal. They are all limited in their
scope to those subjects which have been distinctly
brought before the assembled Bishops. We invite
to them the attention of the various Synods and

Offical “ Letter” of 1878. 187

other governing powers in the several Churches, and
of all the faithful in Christ Jesus throughout the
world.

We do not claim to be lords over God’s heritage,
but we commend the results of this our Conference
to the reason and conscience of our brethren as
enlightened by the Holy Spirit of God, praying that
all throughout the world who call upon the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ may be of one mind, may be
united in one fellowship, may hold fast the Faith
once delivered to the saints, and worship their one
Lord in the spirit of purity and love. |

Signed, on behalf of the Conference, -
A. C. CANTUAR.

C. J. GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL,
Secretary of the Conference.

HENRY, BISHOP OF EDINBURGH,
Secretary of Committees.

I. BRUNEL, Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely,
Assistant Secretary.

NOTE A (page 165).

The Churches thus united are, at this time, the
Church of England and the Churches planted by
her in India, the Colonies, and elsewhere, most of
which Churches are associated into distinct Pro-
vinces!; the Church of Ireland; the Episcopal

* There are six Provinces, viz. :—
India, with six Dioceses.
Canada, with nine Dioceses.
Rupertsland, with four Dioceses.
South Africa, with eight Dioceses.
Australia, with twelve Dioceses.
New Zealand, with seven Dioceses.
And there are twenty Dioceses not yet associated in Provinces.
N 2

188 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

Church in Scotland; the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States of America, with its
Missionary Branches; and the Church in Haiti.
Among the external evidences of the unity of these
Churches, none is more significant than that
- which frequently occurs—the uniting of Bishops of
different Churches, eg., of English, Scottish, and
American Bishops, in that most important function
by which the Episcopal succession is continued. On
more than one occasion, also, the Church in Scotland
has consecrated a Bishop in behalf of the Church of
England, when legal difficulties have impeded the
consecration in England.)

NOTE B (page 166).

One of the results of the first Lambeth Con-
ference was the appointment of a Committee to
prepare a Bill for placing on a more satisfactory
footing the status in England of clergy ordained by
Bishops of Colonial and .other Churches outside the
Church in England.

A Bill to effect this object was introduced by
Lord Blachford into Parliament in the Session of
1873, and became law in the Session of 1874, under
the name of “The Colonial Clergy Act, 1874.”
(37 & 38 Vict., cap. 77.)

The Act does not apply to the clergy of the
Episcopal Church in Scotland. The legal disabilities
of the Scottish clergy were removed, and _ their
position defined, by the Act 27 & 28 Vict., cap 94.

With this exception, the Act of 1874 deals with
the status of all clergy ordained by Bishops other
than Bishops of Dioceses in England and Ireland.
It proceeds upon the assumption that all clergymen
so ordained may be admitted to exercise their
functions in the Church of England; but that the
Bishops of that Church have a right, in respect of

Official “ Letter” of 1878. 189

these clergy, to discretionary powers, analogous to
those which they have in the case of ordination.

The following are the provisions of the Act which
affect the clergy ordained by Bishops other than
those of (1) Dioceses in England; or (2) The
Church of Ireland; or (3) The Episcopal Church in
Scotland. —

“Section 3.—Except as hereinafter mentioned, no
person who has been or shall be ordained Priest or
Deacon, as the case may be, by any Bishop other
than a Bishop of a Diocese in one of the Churches
aforesaid shall, unless he shall hold or have pre-
viously held preferment or a curacy in England,
officiate as such Priest or Deacon in any church or
chapel in England, without written permission from
the Archbishop of the Province in which he proposes
to officiate, and without also making and subscribing
so much of the declaration contained in ‘The
Clerical Subscription Act, 1865, as follows—that
is to say:

“*T assent to the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion,
and to the Book of Common Prayer, and of the
Ordering of Bishops, Priests,and Deacons. I believe
the doctrine of the Church of England as therein
set forth to be agreeable to the Word of God ; and
in public prayer and administration of the sacra-
ments, I, whilst ministering in England, will use the
form in the said Book prescribed and none other,
except so far as shall be ordered by lawful authority.’

“Section 4.—Except as hereinafter mentioned, no
person who has been or shall be ordained Priest or
Deacon, as the case may be, by any Bishop other
than a Bishop of a Diocese in one of the Churches
aforesaid, shall be entitled as such Priest or Deacon
to be admitted or instituted to any benefice or other
ecclesiastical preferment in England, or to act as
Curate therein, without the previous consent in
writing of the Bishop of the Diocese in which suca
preferment or curacy may be situate.

190 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

“Section 5.—Any person holding ecclesiastical pre-
ferment, or acting as Curate in any Diocese in
England under the provisions of this Act, may, with
the written consent of the Bishop of such Diocese,
request the Archbishop of the Province to give him
a licence in writing under his hand and seal in the
following form—that is to say :—

“«To the Rev. A. B.,

“« We, C., by Divine Providence Archbishop of D.,
do hereby give you, the said A. &., authority to
exercise your office of Priest (ov Deacon) according
to the provisions of an Act of the thirty-seventh and
thirty-eighth years of her present Majesty, intituled
“An Act respecting Colonial and certain other
Clergy.”

“* Given under our hand and seal on the
day of

ΝΣ

And if the Archbishop shall think fit to issue such
licence, the same shall be registered in the registry of
the Province, and the person receiving the licence
shall thenceforth possess all such rights and advan-
tages, and be subject to all such duties and liabilities,
as he would have possessed and been subject to if
he had been ordained by the Bishop of a Diocese in
England: Provided that no such licence shall be
issued to any person who has not held ecclesiastical
preferment or acted as Curate for a period or periods
exceeding in the aggregate two years.”

The Act also contains the following provision as
to the Consecration of Bishops :—

“ Section 12.—It shall be lawful for the Archbishop
of Canterbury or the Archbishop of York, for the
time being, in consecrating any person to the office
of a Bishop, for the purpose of exercising Episcopal
functions elsewhere than in England, to dispense, if

Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. IQI

he think fit, with the oath of due obedience to the
Archbishop.”

NOTE C (page 167).

The following extract from the Report refers to
this subject :—“ Your Committee strongly recommend
that all those Dioceses which are not as yet gathered
into Provinces should, as soon as possible, form part
of some Provincial organization. The particular
mode of effecting this in each case must be deter-
mined by those who are concerned.”

The Committee would also call attention to the
concluding paragraph of the same Report :—

“Tn the case of the limits of an existing Province
being altered, the consent of the Synod of that
Province would be required for the alteration.”

No. XXII. (See page 32.)

Latin and Greek Versions of the Bishops’ Letter of
1878. ©

EPISTOLA CENTUM EPISCOPORUM

IN ANGLIA CONGREGATORUM, IN PALATIO LAM-
BETHANO, MENSE JULIO,

ANNO SALUTIS MDCCCLXXVIII.

Fidelibus in Christo salutem in Domino.

Nos Archiepiscopi, Metropolitani, aliique Episcopi
Sancte Catholice Ecclesie, centum numero, cum
Ecclesia Anglicana plenarié communicantes, universi
super Diceceses jurisdictionem Episcopalem exerci-
tantes, vel ad Episcopalia munia in eis obeunda legi-

192 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

time delegati, multi nostrim ex remotissimis orbis
terrarum regionibus, congregati in Palatio Lam-
bethano, anno salutis MDCCCLXXVIII. przsidente
Reverendissimo Przsule Archibaldo Campbell, Di-
vina Providentia Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, totius
Angliz Primate, participes facti, in dicti Palati
sacello, Sacrosanctorum Mysteriorum Corporis et
Sanguinis Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, et orationibus
adunati ad Spirits Sancti directionem impetrandam,
de variis prefinitis quzstionibus consilium inivimus
coetui nostro propositis, ad statum Ecclesiz perti-
nentibus per diversas mundi partes diffuse.

His quzstionibus serio deliberandis complures dies
impendimus, jamque determinationes earum a nobis
approbatas fidelibus in Christo commendamus.!

Quz sit optima ratio pensitantes unitatis con-
servande inter varias nostre Communionis Eccle-
5145, primum omnium Deo Omnipotenti gratias
agentes quam maximas, manifestam unitatem ag-
noscimus, qua Ecclesia Anglicana, et Ecclesize cum
illa visibiliter communicantes, jugiter connexe per-
manserunt.

Conjuncte invicem sub Uno Divino Capite, Jesu
Christo, in unius Catholice et Apostolicz Ecclesiz
societate, firmiter tenentes unam Fidem, in Verbo
Dei revelatam, Symbolis definitam, et a Primitiva
Ecclesia constanter conservatam, easdem Canonicas
Scripturas Veteris et Novi Testamenti recipientes,
utpote omnia continentes ad salutem sempiternam
necessaria, he nostre Ecclesie eundem Dei Ser-
monem predicant, eorundem Sacramentorum, di-
vinitus institutorum, per eorundem ordinum Apos-
tolicorum ministerium dispensatorum, participes sunt,

1 In hac Latina interpretatione eorum capitulorum przecipué
_delectum fecimus quz ad Ecclesiam Universalem attinere
quodammodo videbantur. In Anglico autem archetypo Rela-
tiones Delegationum (Reports of Committees), a Ccetu com-
probate, plenariz reperiuntur.

Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 193

et Eundem Deum et Patrem venerantur, per Eundem
Dominum Jesum Christum, in Eodem Spiritu Sancto
super omnibus fidelibus effuso ad ducendos eos in
omnem veritatem.

Verim enimverd cum hac unitate consociata nun-
quam non extitit ea consuetudinum, discipline et
rituum varietas, que ab illa przrogativa enasci solet,
quam quevis Ecclesia particularis, sive nationalis,
jure sibi vindicat ; scilicet constituendi, immutandi,
atque abrogandi czrimonias vel ritus Ecclesiasticos,
humana tantum auctoritate ordinatos, modo omnia
ad zdificationem fiant.

Libenter quidem profitemur, nullam revera etiam-
num sollicitudinis causam in hac diversitate reperiri.
Constat autem, votum aliquorum animis nuper con-
ceptum vocibus quoque passim significatum fuisse,
hoc presertim intuitu, ut rationes quedam acte
efficaces a nobis adhibeantur, ad occasiones discordim
preecidendas, et ad illam genuinam et essentialeu
unitatem, quz nostras Ecclesias indies supercres-
centes complectitur, manifestandam amplius atque
fovendam.

Primim quidem hujus concordie tuende illa in
mentem venit ratio que inde ab Apostolis ipsis
divinitis inspiratis originem ducens, Ecclesiis omni-
bus in eddem individua et visibili unitate continendis
diu inserviit. Hodierna autem rei Christiane ea est
conditio, infausta quidem sed manifesta, ut Concilium
vere CEcumenicum, ad quod Ecclesia Anglicana se
paratam esse convenire semper professa est, convocari
non possit. Difficultates quidem que impedimento
sunt quominus Synodus ex omnibus Anglicanis Eccle-
5115 conflata congregetur, re diversze et minus graves,
nimize tamen nobis videntur, quam ut illa ratio unitatis
conservandze a nobis commendetur.

Aliud autem experimentum, secunda jam _ vice
factum, congregatio scilicet Episcoporum ab Archi-
episcopo Cantuariensi convocatorum, et Eo pre-
sidente deliberantium spem saltem suppeditat, ques-

194 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

tionem, quz hactenus insolubilis videbatur, rerum
vicissitudine divinitus ordinata sponte solutum iri, ita
ut Procuratores Ecclesiarum, situ et administratione
diversarum, consultandi invicem causa, in unum
coetum coalescant.

Persuasum est nobis, ad unitatem in fide semel
sanctis tradita proxime accedere divini cultis com-
munionem, eamque societates Christianas firmissimo
nexu copulare : et probe recordantes Librum Precum
Communium, ab omnibus nostris Ecclesiis, aliqua-
tenus variatum, retineri,et eximium unitatis vinculum
extitisse, fratres nostros admonendos censemus, divini
cultis communionem immoderatis rituum diversi-
tatibus in discrimen posse adduci. Intrinsecam
Ecclesiarum variarum unitatem custodiende earum
concordiz adjumentum allaturam esse validissimum
confidimus. Et dum libere profitemur, amplam
quandam rituum Ecclesiasticorum flexibilitatem esse
exoptandam, quippe que latum quasi campum pate-
faciat legitimis piorum affectuum significationibus,
nihilominus ad Apostolicum preceptum provocamus,
“Omniaad edificationem fiant,” et ad illam Ecclesiz
Catholice legem principalem, rectum ordinem com-
mendantis atque obedientiam, etsi cum privatorum
sensuum et propensionum abnegatione conjungantur,
tanquam subsidia Christiane Unitatis fundamentalia,
imo etiam ad fidem ipsam efficaciter conservandam
necessaria.

Nolumus huic argumento finem imponere, quin
spem nostram serio testificemur, omnes Ecclesize
fideles agnituros fore, utcunque studiis in varia in-
clinantes, universos oportere subjici, conscientiz ergo,
in rebus ad ritus et cerimonias attinentibus, judiciis
illis auctoritatem obtinentibus, que ab illa Ecclesia
particulari vel nationali promulgata sint, sub cujus
tutela, Dei providentia, sint constituti; et sibi sedulo
temperaturos ab omni qualicunque alienationis
vel exacerbationis occasione; et quotidie Deum
enixé obsecraturos, ut omnia Ecclesia membra a

Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 195

Spiritu Sancto dirigantur ad quecunque recta sint
excogitanda atque exequenda; et ut nos universi
in illa fraterna dilectione, quz pacis est ipsissimum
vinculum et omnium virtutum, adunare dignetur.

* ΩΣ * *

Gratias agimus Deo Omnipotenti maximas, ed quod
protestationes solennes a tot Ecclesiis et societatibus
Christianis per orbem terrarum profectz sint contra
sedis Romanz usurpationes, et contra novicia dog-
mata ejus auctoritate promulgata.

Affectuum benevolorum significatio debetur ab
Ecclesia Anglicana universis, sive Ecclesiis, sive
singulis, contra hos errores protestantibus, quippe
qui difficultatibus forsitan laborent specialibus, quum
propter Incredulitatis incursiones, tum vero propter
Romane sedis arrogantiam.

Nos confitemur Unum tantum “ Mediatorem Dei
et hominum, Hominem Jesum Christum,” “Qui est
super omnia Deus in szcula.” Nos repudiamus,
utpote Scripturis Sacris et Catholicze veritati ad-
versantem, qualemcunque doctrinam alios mediatores
Ejus vice constituentem, vel aliquatenus detrahentem
ab Illius Divina Majestate, et a plenitudine Deitatis
in Illo inhabitantis, que immaculato illo Sacrificio,
semel ab Eo in Cruce propter omnium hominum
peccata oblato, infinitum pretium impertita est.

Commonendi igitur sunt a nobis fideles, facinus
illud a Romano Episcopo patratum, in Concilio
Vaticano, anno MDCCCLXX., quo sibi supereminentiam
super omnes homines in rebus fidei et morum
vindicavit, arrogate sibi Infallibilitatis prztextu,
attributorum Ipsius Domini Nostri Jesu Christi
manifestam fuisse invasionem. pee

Innotuerunt omnibus regulz ille fundamentales,
juxta quas Ecclesia Anglicana seipsam reformavit.
Nos Sanctas Scripturas sufficientem et supremam
fidei regulam esse declaramus, et omnibus nostris
diligenter scrutandas proponimus. Nos fidem nostram

196 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

ipsis Symbolorum antiquorum vocibus profitemur.
Nos Apostolicum ordinem Episcoporum, Presbyte-
rorum et Diaconorum retinemus. Ecclesiarum par-
ticularium sive nationalium libertates legitimas
asserimus. Nos Librum Communium Precationum,
necnon Administrationis Sacramentorum, populis
nostris in manus damus, vernaculo eorum sermone
compositum, et juxta optima et antiquissima fidei
et divini cultis exemplaria adornatum. Orbi uni-
verso patefacta sunt hec nostra documenta ; sciuntur
et leguntur ab omnibus.

Libenter igitur amplectimur universos 5656. re-
formandi studiosos ad amussim Ecclesie primitive.
Rigidam Uniformitatem non flagitamus; superva-
caneas dissensiones deprecamur. Omnibus ad nos
allectis, dum jugum erroris et superstitionis excutere
moliuntur, commodare operam nostrum parati sumus,
et talia eis subministrare privilegia, qualia ipsis
possint esse gratiosa, et nostris ipsorum institutis et
formulis Ecclesiasticis consentanea.

Ἂχ Χ x %

Sed hec hactenus. Quod ad questiones attinet
nobis propositas quz leges Matrimonii tangunt, dum
ex animo agnoscimus angustias, ad quas nonnullz
nostre Ecclesiz a popularium suorum legum latio-
nibus redactz sunt, censemus quoque officium esse
uniuscujusque Ecclesiz operam dare, ut sanctitati
Matrimonii custodiendz consulatur, secundum man-
data in Dei Verbo prescripta, et quemadmodum ab
Ecclesia Christi hactenus sunt recepta.

Rixas quasdam luctuosas de rituum Ecclesiasti-
corum quzstionibus, considerantes, quibus nonnullz
nostre congregationes graviter perturbate sunt nos
affirmamus, nihil in diu usitata cerimoniarum con-
suetudine, contra Episcopi admonitionem, debere
innovari.

Denique, nonnullas novitates, quum in agendo tum
in docendo, quod ad Confessionem attinet, contem-
plantes, nos declaramus Anglicanze Communionis

Latin Version of “Letter” of 1878. 197

Ecclesias firmiter eas leges tenere, que in hanc rem
in Sacris Scripturis sunt promulgate, primitive
Ecclesiz professione sancite, et ab Anglicana Refor-
matione instaurate. Et nos consultO censemus,
nulli Ecclesiz Ministro licere, ab iis, qui ad eum se
recipiunt, doloris aperiendi gratia, omnium sigillatim
peccatorum minutam enumerationem exquirere ; vel
privatam confessionem iis imperare, ante Sacro-
sancte Eucharistiz participationem; vel prezescri-
bere, vel etiam commendare, confessionis consuetudi-
nariz coram sacerdote exercitationem ; vel docere
talem exercitationem, vel sacerdoti subjectionem,
directionis, ut aiunt, causa, conditiones esse neces-
sarias, ad sublimissimam vitam spiritualem attin-
gendam. Nihilominus non in animo habemus quo-
quam modo terminos imponere subsidiis, que in
Libro nostro Precum Publicarum, ad conscientiarum
sollicitarum sublevationem, provide subministrantur,

Hz sunt determinationes questionum nobis pro-
positarum, quatenus Ecclesiz Universalis vel Ec-
clesiarum nostrarum conditionem attingere vide-
bantur.

Ad hec inspicienda varias Ecclesiarum Synodos,
aliosque in eis Ecclesiis auctoritatem exercitantes, et
universos denique Christi fideles, per orbem terrarum
invitamus. Dominationem in cleris non affectamus :
sed has determinationes, a coetu nostro approbatas,
rationi et conscientiz fratrum nostrorum, utpote a
Spiritu Sancto illuminatorum, commendamus, enixé
Deum apprecantes, ut omnes ubique gentium Domini
Nostri Jesu Christi Nomen invocantes, unaé mente
consocientur, in und Communione conjungantur,
unam fidem semel sanctis traditam firmiter com-
plectantur, et unum Suum Dominum in uno puritatis
et dilectionis spiritu venerentur.. Amen.

Subscripsi, in nomine Ccetis Lambethani,

ARCHIBALDUS CAMPBELL,
Archiepiscopus Cantuariensis,

198 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛῊ ἝΚΑΤΟΝ ἘΠΙΣΚΟΠΩΝ

Ἔν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων, ἐν Παλατίῳ Λαμβηθανῷ, μηνὶ
᾿Ιουλίῳ, ἔτει awon (1878).

Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ χαίρειν ἐν Κυρίῳ.

Ἡμεῖς ᾿ἀρχιεπίσκοποι, Μητροπολῖται, καὶ ἄλλοι,
ἐπίσκοποι τῆς ἁγίας Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, συγκοινω-
νοῦντες ὁλοκλήρως τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ ᾿Εκκλησίᾳ, ἑκατὸν
ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμὸν, ἅπαντες ἐπισκοπὴν παροικιῶν
ἐπιτηδεύοντες, ἢ νομίμως ἐπισκοπικὰ τέλη ἐν αὐταῖς
ἐπιτετραμμένοι, συνελθόντες, πολλοὶ ἐξ ἡμῶν ἀπὸ τῶν
μακροτάτων τῆς οἰκουμένης κλιμάτων, ἐν τῷ Παλατίῳ
“Δαμβηθανῷ, ἔτει τῆς τοῦ Κυρίου ἐνσαρκώσεως awor
(1878), προεδρεύοντος σεβασμιωτάτου᾽ Αρχιβάλδου
Κάμπβελλ, τῇ θείᾳ προνοίᾳ ᾿Αρχιεπισκόπου
Καντουαρίας,᾿ Επισκόπων ὅλης ᾿Αγγλίας πρωτο-
θρόνου, μετειληφότες, ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ εἰρημένου παλατίου,
τῶν ἁγίων μυστηρίων τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ
Κυρίου, καὶ προσευχαῖς ἡνωμένοι ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου
Πνεύματος χειραγωγίας, ἐξέτασιν πεποιήκαμεν διαφόρων
ζητημάτων ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων, ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν τῆς
᾿Εκκλησίας σχέσιν ἐν διαφόροις τοῦ κόσμου μέρεσιν.

Περὶ τούτων τῶν ζητημάτων σπουδαίως διὰ πλειόνων
ἡμερῶν συμβεβουλευκότες, παρατιθέμεθα τανῦν τοῖς
πιστοῖς τὰ συμπεράσματα ἡμῖν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν δεδογμένα."

᾿Ενθυμούμενοι τὴν ἐπιτηδειοτάτην μέθοδον πρὸς τὴν
τήρησιν τῆς ἑνότητος τῶν διαφόρων τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινω-
νίας ἐκκλησιῶν, πρώτιστα πάντων ἀναγνωρίζομεν, μετ᾽
ἐγκαρδίου εὐχαριστίας τῷ Παντοκράτορι Θεῷ, Tipe
οὐσιώδη καὶ ἐναργῆ ἑνότητα, ἐν ἣ ἡ ᾿ἀγγλικανὴ ᾿Εκκλη-

Lal

a ΄ , a λ , 2X \

Ev ταύτῃ τῇ petadpace, τῶν κεφαλαίων ἐκλογὴν πεποι-
ἤκαμεν, τῶν μάλιστα τῇ καθόλου ᾿Εἰκκλησίᾳ προσηκόντων" ἐν
δὲ τῷ ᾿Αγγλικῷ τῆς ᾿Επιστολῆς ἀρχετύπῳ ai τῶν ἐπιτροπῶι τοῦ

/ > 4 ᾿ > ας a
συμβουλίου ἐκθέσεις (Reports of Committees), ἀπὸ τοῦ Sup-
βουλίου δοκιμασθεῖσαι, ὁλοτελεῖς εὑρίσκονται.

Greck Version of “Letter” of 1878. 199

σία, καὶ ai ἐκκλησίαι μετ᾽ αὐτῆς OpaTas συγκοινωνούσαι,
διατελοῦσι συνημμένα. ‘Hvwpévar ὑπὸ μιᾶς θείας
Κεφαλῆς, ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῆς μιᾶς
Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας, κατέχουσαν τὴν μίαν πίστιν,
ἐν ταῖς αγίαις Γραφαῖς ἀποκεκαλυμμένην, ἐν τοῖς Συμ-
βόλοις ὡρισμένην, καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ᾿Εκκλησίας
κεκρατημένην, δεχόμεναι τὰς αὐτὰς κανονικὰς Γραφὰς
τῆς παλαιᾶς καὶ τῆς καινῆς Διαθήκης, ὡς τὰ πάντα πρὸς
σωτηρίαν ἀναγκαῖα περιεχούσας, αὗται αἱ ἡμέτεραι
᾿Εκκλησίαι τὸν αὐτὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ λόγον κηρύσσουσι, τῶν
αὐτῶν θεόθεν διατεταγμένων μυστηρίων μεταλαμβάνουσι
διὰ τῆς ὑπηρεσίας τῶν αὐτῶν ἀποστολικῶν βαθμῶν, καὶ
προσκυνοῦσι τῷ αὐτῷ Θεῷ καὶ Πατέρι, διὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ
Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ ἁγίῳ καὶ θείῳ
I νεύματι; πᾶσι τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐπιχορηγουμένῳ » πρὸς
τὸ ὁδηγεῖν αὐτοὺς εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν.

; “μέσως μὲν οὖν μετὰ ταύτης τῆς ἑνότητος, ὑπῆρξεν
ἐν ἡμετέραις ἐκκλησίαις ἐκείνη συνηθείας, διατάξεως,
καὶ λειτουργίας διαφορὰ, ἥτις ἀναγκαίως ἐκφύεται ἐξ
ἀσκήσεως τῆς ἐξουσίας, τῆς ἑκάστῃ μερικῇ ἢ ἐθνικῇ
ἐκκλησίᾳ προσηκούσης, τοῦ διατάσσειν, παραχαράσσειν,
καὶ ἀκυροῦν θεσμοὺς καὶ τελετὰς ἐκκλησιαστικὰς, ὑπ᾽
ἀνθρωπίνης ἐξουσίας διατεταγμένας, μόνον ὥστε πάντα
πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν γίγνεσθαι.

᾿Ασμένως μὲν ὁμολογοῦμεν μηδεμίαν εἰσέτι εὑρί-
σκεσθαι μερίμνης αἰτίαν, διὰ ταύτην τὴν διαφωνίαν.
Ὅμως μέντοι ἐπυπόθησίς τις νεωστὶ ἐπιπολὺ αἰσθήσει
καὶ λόγῳ πεφανέρωται, ὡς ἐννοητέα καὶ πρροσαπτέα εἴη
ὄργανά τινα, πρὸς τὸ ἐκκόπτειν, εἰ τύχοι, ἀφορμὰς
διχοστασίας, καὶ πρὸς τὴν λαμπροτέραν ἀπόδειξιν καὶ
αὔξησιν τῆς ἀληθινῆς καὶ οὐσιώδους ὁμονοίας ἐν ἡμε-
τέραις ἐκκλησίαις ὑπαρχούσης.

Τὸ πρῶτον μὲν εἰς νοῦν ἀνερχόμενον ὄργανον τοιαύτης
ἑνώσεως εὐλόγως ἂν εἴη ἐκεῖνο, ὅπερ, ἀρχὴν ἔχον ἀπὸ
τῶν θεοφόρων ἀποστόλων, συνέζευξεν ἁπάσας τὰς
Χριστοῦ ἐκκλησίας ἐν μιᾷ ἀδιαιρέτῳ καὶ ὁρατῇ κοινωνίᾳ.
᾿Αλλὰ μὲν οὖν ἡ συνάθροισις ἀληθινῶς οἰκουμενικῆς
Συνόδου, πρὸς ὁποίαν ἡ ᾿Αγγλικανὴ ᾿Εκκλησία πάντοτε
ἐπηγγέλλετο ἑτοίμη εἶναι συνέρχεσθαι, ἐν τῇ σημερινῇ

200 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

τοῦ Χριστιανισμοῦ καταστάσει, δυστυχῶς μὲν, ἄχλα
φανερῶς, πέφυκεν ἀμήχανος. Αἱ μὲν ἀπορίαι, αἵτινες
παρακολουθήσειαν ἂν τῇ συνελεύσει συνόδου ἐκ πασῶν
τῶν ἀγγλικανῶν ἐκκλησιῶν συγκεκροτημένης, καίπερ
ἀνόμοιοι καὶ μετριώτεραι τῶν εἰρημένων, ὅμως μέντοι

εἶ Ἃ “Ὁ 7 a >
εἰσὶ βαρύτεραι ἢ συγχωρῆσαι ταύτης τῆς μεθόδου, ἐν
τῷ νῦν χρόνῳ, συναίνεσιν. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ἡ πεῖρα, δὶς γεγονυῖα,
συμβουλίου ἐπισκόπων, ἀπὸ τοῦ Καντουαρίας ᾿άρχι-
ἐπισκόπου συγκεκλημένων, καὶ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ προεδρεύοντος
συνηθροισμένων, ἐλπίδα ἡμῖν παρέχει αὐτομάτου λύσεως
προβλήματος μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ἀλύτου, δηλονότι συν-
αθροίσεως καὶ συμβουλεύσεως τοποτηρητῶν ἐκκλησιῶν
τῇ τε θέσει καὶ τῇ διοικήσει διαφερουσῶν.

᾿Εγγύτατα μετὰ τὴν ἑνότητα ἐν τῇ πίστει, τῇ τοῖς
ἁγίοις ἅπαξ παραδοθείσῃ, πεπεισμένοι ἐσμὲν τὴν
θρησκείας κοινωνίαν ἰσχυρότατον εἶναι σύνδεσμον
πρὸς τὴν σύναψιν τῶν χριστιανικῶν ἑταιριῶν' καὶ
καλῶς μεμνημένοι OTL τὸ ἡμέτερον τῶν δημοσίων
προσευχῶν βιβλίον, μετά τινων οἵων δήποτε ἀλλοιώσεων
ἐν πάσαις ἡμετέραις ἐκκλησίαις κατεχόμενον, ἐξαίρετόν
τι ἑνότητος γέγονε φυλακτήριον, νουθετεῖν ἀξιοῦμεν τοὺς
ἡμεδαποὺς, ὅτι αὕτη ἡ θρησκείας κοινωνία κινδυνεύοι
ἂν λυμαίνεσθαι δι’ ὑπερβολικῶν ἱερουργίας παραλλάξεων.
Ἡ ἐσωτερικὴ μὲν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἑνότης ταύτῃ τῇ
θρησκείας κοινωνίᾳ, καθὼς πεποίθαμεν, ὑπηρετήσει:
ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως, (καίπερ ἐννοοῦντες ὅτι τοία τις ἀμφιλαφὴς
λειτουργικῶν τελετῶν ἐλευθερία αἱρετή ἐστιν, οἵα
πάσαις ταῖς νομίμαις θρησκευτικῶν αἰσθημάτων ἀπο-
δείξεσιν εὐρυχωρίαν ἂν χαρίσαιτο.) τὴν ἀποστολικὴν
παραγγελίαν ἐπικαλούμεθα, ““πάντα πρὸς οἰκοδομὴν
γιγνέσθω," καὶ τὸν καθολικὸν κανόνα ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα,
τὸν διορίζοντα εὐταξίαν καὶ πειθαρχίαν, καίπερ μετ᾽
αὐταπαρνήσεως ἰδίων προσκλίσεων καὶ αἰσθήσεων
ἀποδιδομένας, ὡς χριστιανικῆς ἑνότητος θεμέλια, καὶ ὡς
ἀναγκαίας πρὸς αὐτῆς τῆς πίστεως νικηφόρον ὕὑπερ-
ἄσπισιν. Τουγαροῦν οὐ παυσόμεθα τοιαῦτα νουθε-
τοῦντες πρὶν ἐκφωνῆσαι ἐκτενῶς τὴν ἐλπίδα, ὅτι πάντα
τῶν ἡμετέρων ἐκκλησιῶν τέκνα, ὁποίαις τισὶν οὖν θεω-
pias διαφέροντα, μέλλουσιν ὁμολογεῖν τὸ καθῆκον τοῦ

Greek Version of “ Letter” of 1878. 201

ὑποτάσσεσθαι, Sia τὴν συνείδησιν, ἐν θεσμοῖς καὶ
τελεταῖς θρησκευτικαῖς, ταῖς ἐξουσιαστικαῖς κρίσεσιν τῆς
μερικῆς ἢ ἐθνικῆς ἐκκλησίας, ὑφ᾽ ἧς θείᾳ προνοίᾳ τυγχά-
νωσι κατῳκισμένα" καὶ ὅτι ἀφέξονται παντὸς πράώγματυς
εἰς ἀλλοτρίωσιν ἢ ἐρεθισμὸν τείνοντος, καὶ ὁσήμερον
θερμῶς προσεύξονται, ἵ ἵνα τὸ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα πάντα τῆς
ἐκκλησίας μέλη ὁδηγῇ εἰς τὸ λογίζεσθαι καὶ ἐργάζεσθαι
πάντοτε ἃ δεῖ, καὶ ἡμᾶς πάντας συνώπτῃ τῇ φιλαδελ-
φικῇ ἐκείνῃ ἀγάπῃ, ἥτις ἐστὶν αὐτὸς εἰρήνης καὶ πασῶν
ἀρετῶν σύνδεσμος.
* * x *

Εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ Παντοκράτορι. Θεῷ, OTL σεμνο-
πρεπής τίς διαμαρτυρία ἐξήχηται ἀπὸ πάνυ πολλῶν
ἐκκλησιῶν, καὶ ἀπὸ κοινοτήτων χριστιανῶν καθ᾽ ὅλον
τὸν κόσμον, κατὰ τῶν τῆς Ρωμαίας καθέδρας πλεονεκτη-
μάτων, καὶ κατὰ τῶν νεωτερικῶν δογμάτων, ὑπ᾽ ἐξουσίας
αὐτῆς διωρισμένων.

Ἢ γγλικανὴ ᾿Εκκλησία ὀφείλει πᾶσαν συμπάθειαν
ἐκκλησίαις κοινῇ, καὶ χριστιανοῖς ἰδίᾳ, διαμαρτυρομένοις
κατὰ τούτων πλανημάτων, καὶ στενοχωρουμένοις, εἰ τύ-
χοι, ὑπ᾽ ἀποριῶν ἐξάλλων, διὰ τῶν τῆς ἀπιστίας προσ-
βολῶν, ἅμα καὶ διὰ τῶν τῆς Ῥώμης ἐπιχειρημάτων.

Ἡμεῖς ὁμολογοῦμεν ἕνα μόνον Μεσίτην θεοῦ καὶ
ἀνθρώπων, “AvOpwrov ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστὸν, ὅς ἐστιν ἐπὶ
πάντων Θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ᾿πωθούμεθα,
ὡς ἐναντίον ταῖς Γραφαῖς καὶ τῇ καθολικῇ ἀληθείᾳ, πᾶν
ὁτιοῦν δόγμα, ὅπερ καθιστάναι ἄλλους μεσίτας ἀντ᾽
᾿Εκείνου τολμήσειεν ἂν, ἢ ἀφαιρεῖν ὁτιοῦν ἀπὸ τῆς
θείας μεγαλειότητος τοῦ πληρώματος τῆς θεότητος ἐν
Αὐτῷ κατοικοῦντος, καὶ τιμὴν ἄπειρον παρέχοντος τῇ
ἀμώμῳ ἐκεινῃ θυσίᾳ, τῇ “ἅπαξ ὑ ὑπ᾽ Αὐτοῦ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὅλου
τοῦ κόσμου ἁμαρτιῶν ἐπὶ σταυροῦ προσενεχθείσης.

“Χρεωστοῦμεν οὗν νουθετεῖν τοὺς πιστοὺς, τὸ ἔργον 6
κατείργασται ὁ τῆς “Ρώμης ἐπίσκοπος ἔτει 1870 ἐν τῇ
Βατικανῇ συνόδῳ, δι᾽ οὗ ὑπεροχῆς ἀντεποιήσατο ὑπερ
πάντων ἀνθρώπων, τήν τε πίστιν καὶ τὰ ἤθη, ἐπὶ προ-
σχήματι ἀπλανησίας ἑαυτῷ ἐφαρπασθείσης, ἐπέμβασι:'
γεγονέναι τῶν ἀξιωμάτων τῷ Κυρίῳ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ
προσηκόντων.

202 Lambeth Conference of 1868.

Γνώριμοι πᾶσίν εἰσιν οἱ κανόνες, καθ᾽ ods ἡ Δ γγλικανὴ
᾿Εκκλησία ἑαυτὴν μετερρύθμισεν. ᾿ἀνακηρύττομεν τὴν
αὐτάρκειαν καὶ τὴν ὑπεροχὴν τῶν ἱερῶν Tr ραφῶν, ὡς
ὁριστικὴν πίστεως στάθμην, καὶ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ λαῷ παρ-
αγγέλλομεν σπουδαίαν αὐτῶν μελέτην' τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν
ταῖς τῶν ἀρχαίων Συμβόλων φωναῖς ὁμολογοῦμεν" τὸ ἀπο-
στολικὸν τάγμα Επισκόπων, Πρεσβυτέρων καὶ διακόνων
κατέχομεν" τὴν ἔννομον ἐλευθερίαν μερικῶν ἢ ἐθνικῶν
ἐκκλησιῶν διαβεβαιούμεθα' τῷ λαῷ ἡμῶν ἐγχειρίζομεν,
ἐν τῇ ἐγχωρίῳ αὐτοῦ διαλέκτῳ, βιβλίον προσευχῶν δη-
μοσίων καὶ τελετῶν, καὶ τῶν μυστηρίων ἱερουργίας, κατὰ
τὰ ἄριστα καὶ παλαιότατα χριστιανικῆς πίστεως καὶ
λατρείας ἀρχέτυπα.

Ταῦτα τὰ ἡμῶν μαρτυρήματα ἐνώπιον τῆς οἰκουμένης
ἀναπτύσσεται, γυγνωσκόμενα καὶ ἀναγυγνωσκόμενα ὑπὸ
πάντων ἀνθρώπων.

Acpévas οὖν ἀσπαζόμεθα πᾶσαν πεῖραν μεταρρυθμί-
σεως κατὰ τὸ παράδειγμω τῆς ἀρχαίας ἐκκλησίας" στε-
ρεὰν ταὐτότητα οὐκ ἀπαιτοῦμεν: ἀνωφελεῖς διχοστασία
παραιτούμεθα' πᾶσιν τοῖς πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἐφελκομένοις ἐν
τῷ ἐπιχειρεῖν ἑαυτοὺς ἐλευθερῶσαι ἀπὸ ζυγοῦ πλάνης
καὶ δεισιδαιμονίας πᾶσαν βοήθειαν προθύμως προτεί-
νομεν, καὶ οἷα ἑαυτοῖς περονόμια εἴη ἀρεστὰ, καὶ ἡμετέροις
κανόσιν, τοῖς ἐν ἡμετέραις διατυπώσεσιν ὡρισμένοις, σύμ-
φωνα, ἐθελόντως προκομίζομεν.

* ἧς κ

Περὶ τῶν ζητημάτων ἡμῖν παρατεθέντων ὑπὲρ τῶν
τοῦ Γάμου νόμων ἐμφανίζομεν, ὅτι τὰς ἀπορίας ἐπυγυγνώ-
σκοντες, εν αἷς ἔνιαι ἐκκλησίαι ἐμπλέκονται, διὰ τῶν
θεσμῶν της τοπικῆς νομοθεσίας, νομίζομεν ὅτι δεῖ πᾶσαν
ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ τὴν ἑαυτῆς γνώμην, τὴν τοῦ Γάμου
ἁγιωσύνην διαφυλάττειν, κατὰ τὰ ἐν τῷ ῥήματι τοῦ
Θεοῦ ὁρισθέντα, καὶ καθὰ ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ “Ἐκκλησία
μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ταῦτα δέδεκται.

Ἀναθεωροῦντες τοὺς λυγροὺς διαλογισμοὺς, περὶ τελε-
τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν, δι’ ὧν ἔνια τῶν ἡμετέρων πλήθη
χαλεπῶς τεθορύβηνται, διαβεβαιούμεθα τὸν κανόνα, ὁρί-
tovra μηδὲν δεῖν νεωτερίζειν, ἐν τῇ εἰθισμένῃ θρησκείας
διατάξει, κατὰ τῆς τοῦ ἐπισκόπου νουθεσίας.

Greek Version of “ Letter” of 1878. 203

“οιπὸν ἐνθυμούμενοι καινοτομίας τινὰς, τῇ τε πράξει
καὶ τῇ διδαχῇ, περὶ τῆς ἐξομολογήσεως, διϊσχυριξόμεθα,
τὰς τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας ᾿Εκκλησίας κρατεῖν. βε-
βαίως τοὺς κανόνας περὶ τῆς ἐξομολογήσεως ἐν ταῖς
ἁγίαις Γραφαῖς ἀποδεδευγμένους, καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχαίας
᾿Εκκλησίας συνωμολογημένους, καὶ ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικῇ Με-
ταρρυθμίσει᾽ ἀνακεκαινωμένους" καὶ ἐσκεμμένως ἐγνώ-
Kaper, μ μηδενὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ὑπηρέτῃ ἐξεῖναι ἀπαιτεῖν
ἐκ τῶν πρὸς αὑτὸν φοιτώντων, διὰ τὴν τῆς αὐτῶν λύπης
ἀνάπτυξιν, ἁπασῶν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν κατὰ μέρος ἑκάστων
ἐξαρίθμησιν, ἢ ἢ ἰδίαν ἐξομολόγησιν ἐκβασανίζξειν, πρὸ τῆς.
ἁγίας εὐχαριστίας μεταλήψεως, ἢ ἐπιτάσσειν ἢ καὶ
παραινεῖν τὴν τῆς συνήθους τῷ ἱερεῖ ἐξομολογήσεως
ἐπιτήδευσιν, ἢ ἢ διδάσκειν ὅ ὅτι τοία ἐπιτήδευσις, ἢ ἢ τὸ ὑπο-
τάσσεσθαι τῇ οὑτωσὶ καλουμένῃ. ἱερέως “ειραγωγίᾳ,
ἀναγκαῖά ἐστι προπαιδεύματα πρὸς τὴν τῆς ἀνωτάτης
πνευματ τικῆς ζωῆς ἐπίβασιν. “Ὅμως μέντοι οὐδαμῶς
ἐννοοῦμεν ἐπιτέμνειν τὴν ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ τῶν δημοσίων

προσευχῶν, πρὸς τὸν βεβαρημένων συνειδήσεων ἐπι-
κουφισμὸν, ἐπιχορηγίαν προνενοημένην..

Ταῦτά ἐστι τὰ συμπεράσματα εἰς ἃ κατηντήκαμεν,
περὶ τῶν ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων ζητημάτων, ἐν οἷς τὰ
πάντων τῆς Καθολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησίας τέκνων ἁπτόμενα
ταῖς συνόδοις ἐκκλησιῶν, καὶ ταῖς ἐξουσίαις καθ᾽ € ἑκάστην
κυβερνητικαῖς, καὶ πᾶσιν ἁπλῶς τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ
Ἰησοῦ φιλοφρόνως σαφηνίξομεν.

Οὐκ ἀντιποιούμεθα τοῦ κατακυριεύειν ἐν κλήροις,
ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τῷ ἡμετέρῳ. συμβουλίῳ ἀ ἀρέσαντα συνίστα-
μεν τῷ λογισμῷ καὶ τῇ συνειδήσει τῶν ἀδελφῶν, ὡς
ὑπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος πεφωτισμένων, ἐκτενῶς Θεῷ
προσευχόμενοι, ἵνα πάντες οἱ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Κυρίου ἐ emt
καλούμενοι, μιᾷ γνώμῃ καὶ μιῷ κοινωνίᾳ ἡνωμένοι, τὴν
πίστιν τὴν ἅπαξ τοῖς ἁγίοις παραδοθεῖσαν βεβαίως κρα-
τῶσιν, καὶ τῷ ἑνὶ αὐτῶν Κυρίῳ ἐν ἑνὶ ἀφθαρσίας καὶ
ἀγάπης bh sar λατρεύωσιν. μήν.

Ὑπέγραψα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ συμβουλίου,
ΑΡΧΙΒΑΛΔΟΣ KAMIIBEAA,
‘O Καντουαρίας ᾿Αρχιεπίσκοπος.

O 2

204 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

No. XXIII. (See page 26.)

OFFICIAL LIST OF THE BISHOPS PRESENT AT TIIE
LAMBETH CONFERENCE OF 1878.

THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF YORK.

THE ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN.

THE BIsHOP OF LONDON.

THE BiIsHOP OF WINCHESTER.
THE BISHOP OF LLANDAFF.

THE BISHOP OF RIPON.

THE BIsHOP ΟΕ NORWICH.

THE BISHOP OF BANGOR.

THE BisHorp oF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL
THE BISHOP OF CHESTER.

THE BisHopP oF 51. ALBAN’S.
THE BISHOP OF HEREFORD.

THE BISHOP OF PETERBOROUGH.
THE BIsHoP ΟΕ LINCOLN.

THE BIsHoP OF SALISBURY.

THE BISHOP OF CARLISLE.

THE BISHOP OF EXETER.

THE BISHOP OF BATH AND WELLS. .
THE BISHOP OF OXFORD.

THE BISHOP OF MANCHESTER.
THE BIsHoP OF CHICHESTER.
THE BisHor ΟΕ ST. ASAPH.

THE ΒΙΞΗΟΡ oF ELy.

THE ΒΙΒΗΟΡ or St. DAVID’S.
THE BISHOP OF TRURO.

THE BISHOP OF ROCHESTER.

THE BISHOP OF LICHFIELD.

THE BISHOP OF SODOR AND MAN.

THE BISHOP OF MEATH.
THE BisHop oF Down.
THE BisHor OF KILLALOE.
THE BisHop ΟΕ LIMERICK.
THE BISHOP OF DERRY.
THE BIsHop OF CASHEL.
THE BisHor OF Ossory.

Official List of Bishops Present, 1878.

THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE

THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE

THE
THE

THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE

THE
THE
THE

THE
THE
THE
THE
THE
THE

THE
THE

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF

OF
OF
OF
OF
OF

Moray. Primus.
St. ANDREW’S.
EDINBURGH.
ABERDEEN,
GLASGOW.
BRECHIN.
ARGYLL.

DELAWARE.

New YorK.

OHIO.

PENNSYLVANIA.
WESTERN NEW YORK.
NEBRASKA.
PITTSBURGH.
LOUISIANA.

MISSOURI.

Lone ISLAND.
ALBANY.

CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA.

ASSISTANT BiIsHop OF NORTH CAROLINA.

BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHOP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

OF
OF
OF
OF

OF
OF

OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF
OF

OF
OF
OF

OF
OF
OF
OF
OF

OF
OF
OF

NEW JERSEY.
WISCONSIN.
IowA.
COLORADO,

HalIri.
SHANGHAI,

MONTREAL, JZetropolitan.
FREDERICTON.

Nova SCOTIA.

ONTARIO.

HuRON.

TORONTO.

NIAGARA.

MADRAS.
COLOMBO.
BOMBAY.

GUIANA.
KINGSTON.
ANTIGUA.
BARBADOS.
NASSAU.

SYDNEY. AZetropolitan.
ADELAIDE,
NORTH QUEENSLAND.

205

206

THE BISHOP
THE BISHOP

THE BISHOP

THE BISHOP
THE BISHOP
THE BISHOP
THE BISHOP
THE BISHOP

THE BISHOP
THE BISHOP
THE BISHOP

THE BISHOP
THE BISHOP

Lambeth Conference of 1878.

OF CHRISTCHURCH. Metropolitan.
OF DUNEDIN.

OF GIBRALTAR.

OF CAPETOWN.
OF ST. HELENA.
OF MARITZBURGH.
OF BLOEMFONTEIN.
OF PRETORIA.

Metropolitan.

OF RUPERTSLAND. AJZetropolitan.
OF BRITISH COLUMBIA.
OF SASKATCHEWAN,

OF THE FALKLAND ISLANDS.
SUFFRAGAN OF DOVER.

SUFFRAGAN OF GUILDFORD.
SUFFRAGAN OF NOTTINGHAM.

BISHOP PERRY.
BisHop McCDOUGALL.
BIsHOP RYAN.
BISHOP CLAUGHTON.

Officers of {He Conference.

THE BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL, Secretary yt the
Conference.

THE BISHOP OF EDINBURGH, Secretary of Committees.

ISAMBARD BRUNEL, D.C.L., (Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely,
Asststant Secretary.

No. XXIV. (Sce page 20.)

Order of Bishops tn the Processions at Lambeth Palace
and in St. Paul’s Cathedral in 1878.

The following is an official list, as prepared for the
Processions on July 2 and July 27, 1878. The order
had to be materially changed on the occasion of the
actual services, by the absence, at the moment, of

Order of the Bishops in Processions. 207

Bishops who had been expected, but the same prin-
ciple of arrangement was in each case followed. The
Archbishop of Canterbury had the Archbishop of
York and the Bishop of London on his right and
left hand, and was preceded by the Metropolitans of
the Irish, Scottish, and Colonial Provinces. The
Bishops from the United States walked, as guests,
abreast of the English Diocesans. The other Bishops
were arranged, two and two, according to date of
consecration. The processions moved, as usual, in
reverse order, the junior Bishops first, the Arch-
bishops last.

Archbishop of York. Archbishop of Canterbury. Bishop of London.

- Armagh.
Dublin.
Bishop of Delaware. Primus of Scottish ἮΝ Winchester.
Episcopal Church.
‘a New York. _ Bishop of Sydney. wi Llandaff.
δ Ohio. Ἢ Christchurch, fe Ripon.
New Zealand.
ὥ Pennsylvania. Montreal. Re Bangor.
je Western New Capetown. :, f Gloucester ἃ
York. \ Bristol.
Nebraska. Rupert’s Land. Chester.
Bishop of Pittsburgh. Bishop ot St. Alban’s.
oe Louisiana, "" Hereford.
a Missouri. δὰ Peterborough.
- Long Island. ἣν Lincoln.
"ὦ Albany. <a Salisbury.
Central Pennsylvania. ἣν Carlisle.
Assistant Bishop of North Carolina. ai Exeter.
Bishop of New Jersey. FY Bath and Wells.
a Wisconsin. oe Oxford.
τ Towa. m Manchester.
$3 Colorado. Τὰ Chichester.
e St. Asaph. a Ely.
ie St. David’s. Ῥ Rochester.
ts Truro. “ Lichfield.
ἐν, Sodor and Man. ae Dover.
Guildford. fe Nottingham.
Bishop Perry. Killaloe.
»» M*‘Dougall. Bishop Ryan.
Bishop of Meath. », Claughton.

And the other Bishops according to their date of consecration.

208 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

No. XXV. (Sce page 33.) .

Sermon preached by Bishop Stevens, of Pennsylvania,
wn St. Paul’s Cathedral, on Saturday, july
27th, 1878.

“ And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men
unto Me.”— Sz. Joh xii. 32.

Most Rev. Fathers and Brethren Beloved—

It is with unfeigned diffidence that I stand before
you this morning.

Deeply as I appreciate the honour of having been
selected as your preacher, still more deeply am I
burdened with a sense of the responsibility which
rests upon me as your mouthpiece on this great
occasion. Not that 1 am commissioned to speak
your views, or declare what we have said or done,
but I am your mouthpiece as guiding your thoughts
in this closing hour, and summing them up in words
appropriate to the valedictory of this remarkable
Conference. May the Holy Ghost so illumine my
mind that I may think only those things which are
right, and so touch my lips that I shall speak only
that which shall be for the glory of the Triune
God !

I shall not attempt to review the doings of the
Conference now brought to an end. Within this
present month, and within the Library of Lambeth
Palace, has been made a history, the record of which
will constitute one of the most illuminated chapters
in the annals of the Holy Catholic Church. Never
before have so many English-speaking Bishops met
together. Never before have all branches of the

Serion of the Bishop of Pennsylvania, 209

Anglican Communion been so fully represented in
an ecclesiastical assembly. Such a gathering con-
verges to itself the eyes of the thinking world, and
such a gathering must radiate from itself a power for
weal or woe that shall reach to far-distant ages. The
history of that Conference is made. The result of
that Confererice will be fully known only when the
record of eternity shall be revealed. We met as
standard-bearers of the Cross of Christ. That fact
has been the prominent one in all our deliberations,
and we separate to go back to our dioceses, more
impressed than ever that it is in and through an
uplifted Christ—faithfully held up and fully dis-
played, that our work can be accomplished, and all
men—men of all races, all climes, all countries—be
drawn to the feet of the Crucified and to the Church,
which is His Body. In this precious truth we have
found not only a bond of personal union, but of real
unity throughout the wide-spreading branches of our
Holy Church.

Our little diversities, personal and national, as to
non-essentials of faith and the accessories of worship,
look very small before the great essentials in which
we all agree. We feel that we all rest on the same
corner and foundation stones laid in Zion, even
Christ and His Apostles, and the eternal and distinc-
tive verities of faith revealed in God’s Holy Word.

This sacred depositum intrusted to the Church as
the keeper and witness of the faith once delivered
to the saints, embodied in the creeds of Christendom,
endorsed by the undisputed General Councils, and
maintained and defended by the consensus of the
undivided Church in the writings of the early
Fathers, is the blessed heritage of us all, and binds
us together in the oneness and unity of a living
organism, operating through diverse members and
by diverse functions, yet all holding to the one
Divine Head—nourished by the one Divine Blood,
breathing the one Divine Breath of Life.

210 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

Another fact, which has grown out of the more
faithful lifting up of the Lord Jesus Christ, and
which this Conference has brought prominently out,
is the increase of spiritual life and work in all the
branches of the Anglican Church. The reports of
the Bishops from every quarter testify to this
pleasing fact. Not only is this increase seen in
a more widely-spread and deeper-toned personal
piety, but also in the gratifying increase of reverence
for holy things and places, in the more life-inspiring
renderings of our beautiful Liturgy, in the more
frequent celebrations of the Holy Communion, and
in the multifarious forms of Church work springing
up in all our dioceses and missionary jurisdictions.

It is further seen in the bringing into effective and
judicious use agencies for the cultivation of personal
holiness, and the better reaching of the sick and the
poor, and for the wider extension of Church privi-
leges, which have either never been used before, or
which have long been disused, because abused to
purposes of superstition and error. We feel, and
I think rightly, that whatever has been done or used
in other ages, or by other communions, which has
been productive of good, even though tainted with
the evils of the age, or the communion using them,
ought not on that account to be set aside; but
rather should be reclaimed from wrong-doing, and
by wise and authoritative adaptation be made to
serve the right and the true in faith and worship.
Hence implements of spiritual tillage, hitherto neg-
lected or suspected, have been remodelled and rightly
utilised.

Methods of Church work, which were once looked
upon with distrust, have been prudently adjusted to
our own needs and times. Our Blessed Lord gave
to His Church that same power of self-adjustment
which in a higher and holier way He showed in His
own conduct when on earth. He gave it marvellous
flexibility of circumference, combined with central

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 211

fixedness and unchangeableness—flexibility, so as
to conform to all the outlines of human needs, just
as He has made the great ocean to flow as readily
into the little cove beside the fisherman’s hut as into
the magnificent bays which harbour the navies of the
world ; and fixedness, so that the substantial body
of truth shall never be changed, just as He holds the
same great ocean in the hollow of His Hand. The
multiplied agencies which the Church has set in
motion in the last half-century illustrate what I mean
as to adjustment of the Church to the demands of
modern society.

Specially I may mention the introduction of lay-
helpers, both men and women, into the active service
of the Church. The fact proves that the Church is.
reviving from her languid state, when it was too
much the fashion to regard the clergy as the Church,
and rather to frown upon lay effort as trenching upon
clerical prerogative. It was this spirit which lost to
the Church of England the fruit of that great
uprising of zeal under the Wesleys and Whitfield,
which, had it been recognised and utilised, and
taught to work in Churchly channels, as it now
would be, would have rooted the Church of England
tenfold more in the hearts of the toiling classes, and
kept them from drifting away into fragmentary
divisions; would have welded together social
elements which would admirably supplement each
other ; and would have made the disestablishment
and denationalisation of the Church of England
utterly impossible.

The introduction of the lay element into the
councils of the Church, whether diocesan or Convoca-
tional, is a grave question, because, in some cases,
encumbered with serious difficulties. Therefore each
national Church must deal with it as a national
question, and settle it as shall best subserve its
national interests. But the patent fact is, that the
bringing in of the laity as a constituent part of the

212 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

various working assemblies of the Church has in the
United States and in many of the Colonial provinces
and dioceses been of the highest value to the cause of
our holy faith. Intrust the laity with responsibility,
and you secure their confidence. Make them a part
of your deliberate counsels, and they will educate
themselves to discharge aright the duties of their
position. Let them realise that the Church leans
upon their wisdom as well as upon their purse, and
they will show that strong common sense, knowledge,
and discretion which shall make them as powerful
allies in Church legislation as they now are in Church
work.

It is true that with this increase of vitality has
been an increase of abnormal life, running out into
excesses, both in doctrine and in ritual. In a
Church made up of imperfect beings, with all possible
tastes, temperaments, and idiosyncrasies, such evils
cannot well be avoided. Our Blessed Lord told us
in His parables that this would be the case. St.
Paul distinctly declared to the Corinthians that
“there must be also heresies among you, that they
which are approved may be made manifest among
you,” thus not merely recognizing in His day, and in
Apostolic Churches, the existence of this Church life
running out into wrong channels of thought and
action, but giving as a reason for its permissive
existence, that the Lord used these heresies and
these sects as a means of testing and manifesting the
true,—making the true more clearly true by placing
alongside of it its stimulating error.

Nor has the Church of Christ ever been free from
these errors, and the words of our Lord in the parable
of the Tares and Wheat, “Let both grow together
until the harvest,” and then saying that that harvest
was the end of the world, indicates with certainty
that these heresies, and this schismatic spirit, will
continue the earthly lifetime of the Church.
Lamentable indeed are these displays, splitting off

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 213

from the Church into open schism, on the one hand,
or raising up factions, turbulent and menacing,
within the bounds of the Church, on the other.

These evils can only be partially held in check
or corrected by any legal or technical decisions of
civil or ecclesiastical courts, for in some instances
they have fostered more scandals than they have
allayed. The real remedy lies in another direction.
It is to draw men to a common centre by preaching
a great central and unifying truth. That great
central truth is that which is both centred and
sphered in an unlifted Christ. When men are drawn
to His person, His service, and His salvation, you
have a basis for that real unity which alone meets
the conditions of our Lord’s intercessory prayer—
“That they all may be one, as Thou Father art in
me, and I in Thee.” Not organically one, but one
in the harmony of an interior life derived from a
common source, sustained by a common faith, and
having a common end and aim.

When the pure strength of Evangelical truth
welling up in life-giving freshness in the Word of
God shall flow more freely through the channels of
Apostolic order and sacramental ordinances; when
this Evangelical spirit, to which the Church of
England owed its revival of life and activity in the
last century, shall avail itself more of churchly
agencies, and address itself more to working along
Church lines, with the same zeal with which it has
so well addressed itself to the maintenance and
defence of doctrine, and shall thus make the clergy
and the parishes alive with new-born zeal and love,
showing by their own example that they are as
earnest, as sincere, as self-sacrificing, as sound in the
faith and as loyal to the Church as those whom they
condemn—then will the spirit of lawlessness, and
erroneous and strange doctrine, and the sickly
imitations of a foreign communion be met and
answered by a purer faith, a more Christ-like zeal, a

214 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

more obedient reverence to the powers that be as
ordained of God, and a higher and holier aim—
namely, the advancement, not of self nor of party,
but the honour and glory of the uplifted Christ.
Looking in another direction, we find the Church
confronted by critical scepticism and scientific doubt,
which aim to break down the bulwarks of her faith
and raze her walls of salvation to the ground. But
while we survey this frowning evil, let us not be un-
duly alarmed, or make too hasty concessions, but be
vigilant and wise in meeting it on broad and sound
erounds. Holding to the Bible as our sole rule of
faith and practice, we must maintain the supremacy
of the Bible by placing it in its right position ; and
that is, that it is a perfectly completed book. The
Bible of to-day is the Bible of all the centuries of the
Christian era, and will be of all the centuries to come.
As it came from Him, it can neither be added to nor
taken from without incurring the anathema of its
Author. But the science which opposes this Bible
is but the science of to-day. It was not the science
of the last century; it will not be of the century to
come. These sciences, of whatever name, are vari-
able and uncertain. Not one is on a fixed and im-
movable basis. Not one that may not be altered, or
set aside by some new discovery, or by some new
generalization. It will be time enough to say whether
these sciences and the Bible do agree when the per-
fected circle of science shall be placed on the per-
fected circle of the Holy Scriptures. Then only can
we rightly measure each, and when that time comes
it will be found that the circumference of science and
the circumference of revelation have one and the
same periphery, because they have one and the same
Divine Centre, the same one living and true God.
In the Apostles’ day there were “oppositions of
science falsely so-called.” In every age since then
the same assaults have been renewed, but the Bible
has calmly held on its way. It waits patiently for

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 215

confirmation as the ages roll on, and each advance
of true science does bring it more into accord
with revelation. What the clergy have to do is not
to attempt to put on Saul’s armour and go forth to
fight what they would call a Philistine science with
something that they have not proved and cannot
wield, but to take the smooth stones out of the brook
of Scripture, and in the name of the Uplifted One so
hurl them that even giant defiers of the Israel of God
shall fall before the simple truth, slung by the hum-
blest shepherd of the flock. This preaching is now,
as in Paul’s day, to the Jew a stumbling-block, and
to the Greek foolishness, but it is still what it was
then, and what it will ever be, Christ the power of
God and the wisdom of God. When the Apostles
preached this uplifted Christ, they did it not in the
words which man’s wisdom teacheth, lest the Cross
of Christ should be made of none effect, but with
that simple plainness of men fully imbued with the
truth which they heralded, and telling it out in the
fulness and directness of that earnestness which all
will feel who realize that they are bought with a
price, even the precious blood of the uplifted Jesus.
Looking in still another direction, we find the
Church in the midst of social evils which threaten
alike the well-being of the Church and of the State.
Can the Church deal with these manifold economical
questions which at times so seriously agitate the
whole framework of human society? Yes. The
uplifting of Christ will do it. The most important
factor in the world’s history was the coming down
into it of Christ our Lord. His incarnation is the
axle on which turn all the wheels of human life.
Any science of sociology which leaves Him out as its
central and controlling power is, like a science of the
solar system without the sun, erroneous at its centre
and erroneous at its circumference. It is the pre-
sence of Christ in the world that has given birth to
all the philanthopies of the world—is banishing its

216 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

most crying evils and bringing in all that is refining
and elevating in mind and heart and life. This
being so, and no student of history can truly deny it,
it follows that all that is needed to meet and remove
the social evils of our time is the clear, true, and
forceful setting forth of Christ as the Light and Life
of men. For justin proportion as they bask in His
light and breathe the breath of His life will they
become Christlike in mind and heart, and the preva-
lence of the mind of Christ and the love of Christ
will change the moral and social aspect of the world.

Finally, God has set before the Church of this
age an open door into the regions beyond and bidden
her go in and possess the land. Never, it may truly
be said, has the Church been so thoroughly equipped
as now for missionary work. Geographical explora-
tion and commercial adventure have opened up to us
long unknown and almost mythical regions. Ethno-
logy and philology have brought the varying lan-
guages and races of men into better classification.
Technical art and science have put into our hands
implements and skill for reforming and enlarging all
the industrial pursuits of men. Thus these auxiliary
forces become in the progress of time almost apostles
of Christianity.

A higher and truer education in heathen lands
must result in breaking down the old errors based
on ignorance and superstitions. Science is already
at work through manifold ways, undermining and
sapping the Oriental religions—Buddhism, Brah-
minism, Confucianism, Lamaism — and preparing
the way for their downfall. It has not been until
within a few years that we have really understood
the doctrines, usages, and inner power of the
dominating religions of Asia. We have known their
general features, but have mostly grouped them
all together in one idolatrous mass of hopeless
superstition and cruel orgies, and as such have
levelled our theological artillery relentlessly against

Sermon of the Bishop oy Pennsylvania. 217

them. Now, however, through the labours of men
who seem to have been specially raised up for the
purpose, the eight great religions of the world into
which Max Miiller reduces the many schemes of
human worship have been studied and analysed, and
their sacred books carefully translated, annotated,
and compared with our own, so that almost a new
science—the science of comparative religion—has
been created by the diligent and painstaking men
who have made careful surveys of these Oriental
religions, and enabled us to weigh, measure, and
examine systems of belief which hold more than one-
half the human race in their moulding power. Thus
Christianity is fast acquiring all those outside forces
necessary to give to it a world-wide equipment for
its world-wide conquest. And when the evangelistic
forces of the Church shall go forth in their full power,
it will be with a momentum hitherto unknown,
enabling her to do in a day the work of a year, and
in a year the work of centuries, until, through these
vastly-augmented agencies, blessed and utilised by
the Holy Ghost, it shall be literally true as the pro-
phet has declared, “a nation shall be born in a day.”

Brethren, beloved, this is the great work which is
intrusted to us in an especial manner, to proclaim in
all the quarters of the world where our lot is cast an
uplifted Jesus. We are to lift Him up by exalting
the Divine Scripture, in which He is enshrined; by
exalting the sacrament which shows forth this up-
lifting until He come; by exalting the ministry
appointed by Christ Himself to be His heralds and
teachers; by exalting the Church, which is His
mystical Body,—exalting all these things, not by
exalting them above Him, of Whom and to Whom
they all testify ; but because they are all means and
aids for getting a better, clearer, and more life-giving
view of the uplifted Jesus.

All attempt to put anything between the soul
of the sinner and the uplifted Christ, or to raise

218 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

anything to the same level with Him, is derogatory
to His honour and contrary to His Word. To what
purpose would the bitten Israelite have been told to
look at the serpent of brass lifted up by Moses in the
wilderness if anything had been placed by Moses or
the elders of Israel between the eyes of the sufferer
and the object to which he was directed to look? Or
if alongside of that serpent of brass had been placed
other objects to which equal efficacy was attributed,
and thus confused his mind and deflected his faith ?
This lifting up of Christ in all the aspects of His
offices as Prophet, Priest, and King can be done by
us only as we are taught by the Holy Ghost, for it
is His office to take of the things of Christ and to
show them unto men. Dear brethren, if there is one
thought more than another which presses upon me at
this time, in reference especially to the work com-
mitted to us as Bishops in the Church of God, it is
that we need a fresh baptism of the Holy Spirit and
fresh outpouring into our hearts of the love-power of
the uplifted Jesus. If even Apostles, the three years’
daily companions of our blessed Lord when He
dwelt among men, had no power to preach the Cross
of Christ until the Holy Spirit came upon them,
surely we need to be sprinkled from on high, that
Pentecostal grace may not merely light upon our
heads in tongue-like flames but that, like the precious
ointment upon the head of Aaron that went down to
the skirts of his garments, the unction that the Holy
Spirit only can bestow may flow over our whole being,
sanctifying our lives, enlightening our minds, giving
grace to our lips, and wisdom to our acts, and power
to our administration, so that it may be said of each
of us as of the first martyr, St. Stephen, “He was a
man: full of faith and of the Holy Ghost.” :
Our ministry of the Word and our office as Bishops
can only be duly and wisely discharged in and
through the power and guidance of the Holy Ghost.
Let us never forget that this is the source of all

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania. 210

ministerial strength and grace and influence. Our
constant and wrestiing prayer should be that we may
daily increase in that Holy Spirit more and more
until we come unto His everlasting kingdom.

Let us also, dear brethren, endeavour to induce the
clergy to be more diligent and distinct in setting
forth this uplifted Christ as the great sunlike truth
of our salvation. The real remedy for the troubles
within our own Church is not by repressive, or by
restrictive, or by punitive legislation ; is not by courts
of law, civil or ecclesiastical ; is not by bandying
criminous and contemptuous words, and organising
parties in battle array under standards and principles
foreign to the spirit of the Gospels, but it is a more
faithful setting forth of Christ.

But I must stop, though many and weighty topics
rise in my mind, created by the occasion.

The day has arrived when this assembly of Angli-
can Bishops will separate. But before we separate,
our hearts are to be re-knit together by participation
in that blessed Sacrament which, while it binds each
to each, binds all as one to the heart of our common
Lord. From that altar we shall.go away northward
to the Arctic Circle, southward to Australia, east-
ward to China, westward to the United States, never
to meet together as a body here below. Of the
seventy-six Bishops gathered at the last Lambeth
Conference in 1867, thirty are dead. Death has
reaped out of that assembly a rich harvest, and
garnered up some of the wisest, the noblest, the
holiest men, who ever bore the burden of the Epis-
copate. They rest together in the Paradise of God.

This thought cannot but give a tone of solemnity
to this sacred hour; yet along with this under-tone
of sorrow rises up our souls’ Ze Deum that we have
been permitted to meet as brethren, to confer so long
and so lovingly together, and to part with that pro-
found respect and affection which intercourse has
engendered and which love has cemented.

: roa

220 Lambeth Conference of 1878.

Speaking as an American Bishop, and in behalf
of American Bishops, I feel warranted in saying that
we desire thus publicly to acknowledge the manifold
courtesies and civilities which have been so markedly
bestowed upon us—that we appreciate and shall ever
remember the unwearied kindness and loving words
of our brethren of the English bench, and of all others
who made up this Conference.

We have learned here lessons of wisdom and zeal
which will influence all our future. We go back
richer than we came, for we return with the wealth
of new friendships, new plans of usefulness, new
aspirations after higher results, and the treasured
memories of Church life and home life into which, as
into a garden of spices, we have been so lovingly
invited. Our admiration of the Church of England
has been greatly increased. As we have walked
around its walls, grey with antiquity, and marked
well its bulwarks, scarred, but not weakened, by the
conflicts of the Christian centuries; as we have
associated with those who bear Episcopal rule in this
Zion, and with the band of learned and self-sacrificing
clergy who work therein, and with the intelligent
and zealous and liberal laity that form the noble
body of the faithful—as we have surveyed all these
we may have seen here and there things that are
strange to us, points that we should have altered,
defects, as we might term them, that needed correc-
tion, the filling up of some crevice here, and the
stripping off of some of the old ivy there ; but after all
we should be forced toexclaim, “ Beautiful for situation,
the joy of the whole earth is this City of our God: Her
foundations are on the everlasting hills. The Lord is
in the midst of her; she shall not be moved. God shall
help her, and that right early.” As I behold the
‘grand spectacle which the Anglican Church now
presents—bristling with its. multiplied agencies
and vigorous with re-enkindled life and earnestness,
and contrast it with the impotence of its assailers

Sermon of the Bishop of Pennsylvania, 221

and the envy of its rivals, I recall the magnificent
vision of Milton, in which he describes the rising
power and glory of the Commonwealth; and
substituting the word “Church” for the word
“nation,” I seem to find in it a description of
the present aspect of the spiritual commonwealth
of dear old England. “Methinks,” says the blind
bard, “I see in my mind, a noble and puissant
Church, rousing herself like a strong man after sleep,
and shaking her invincible locks; methinks I see
her as an eagle, renewing her mighty youth, and
kindling her undazzled eyes at the full midday beam,
purging and unscaling her long-abused sight at the
fountain itself of heavenly radiance ; while the whole
noise of timorous and flocking birds, with those also
that love the twilight, flutter about amazed at what
she means,’ and, I may add, confounded at her
revived greatness. And so we say, with one mouth
and one heart, to the dear mother of us all, the
Church of England, “ Peace be within thy walls, and
plenteousness within thy palaces. For my brethren
and companions’ sake, I will wish thee prosperity.”

The next time, dear brethren, that we meet
together will be before the Great White Throne.
Such a thought warns us that we must be watching,
waiting, working, until the day of death comes ; and
when that shall come, may we each, through faith in
the atoning blood of the uplifted Jesus, pass in
through the gate into the celestial city, and hear
from the lips of Him who sitteth upon the throne,
“Well done, good and faithful servant, enter thou
into the joy of thy Lord.”

222 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No. XXVI.

Prayer for the Conference.

LORD God Almighty, Father of Lights and

Fountain of all Wisdom : we humbly beseech Thee
that Thy Holy Spirit may lead into all truth Thy servants
the Bishops now [to be] gathered together in Thy Name.
Grant them Grace to think and do such things as shall
tend most to Thy Glory and the good of Thy Holy
Church : direct and prosper, we pray Thee, all their con-
sultations, and further them with Thy continual help, that,
the true Catholic and Apostolic Faith once delivered to
the Saints being maintained, Thy Church may serve Thee
in righteousness of living and in all godly quietness

through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Programme of Conference. 223

No. XXVII.

Papers issued to the Bishops before the first Services
or Meetings in connection with the Conference
of 1888.

(1) PROGRAMME.

The following are the official arrangements with
respect to the forthcoming Lambeth Conference.

SATURDAY, JUNE 30th.
3.0 p.m. * Service in Canterbury Cathedral.

MonpDaAY, JULY 2nd.
7. p.m. * Service in Westminster Abbey, with
Sermon by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

[Bishops and Chaplains attending this Service will enter
the Abbey through Dean’s Yard, by the Jerusalem Cham-
ber entrance. |

TUESDAY, JULY 3rd.
11.0am. * Holy Communion in Lambeth Palace
Chapel, with Sermon by the Bishop of Minnesota,
deputed by the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the United States.

1.30 p.m.—4.45 p.m.
First Session of the Conference in Lambeth
Palace Library—

(A) Opening Address by the Archbishop of
Canterbury.
(8) Discussion of Subject (No. II.)—“ Definite

teaching of the Faith to various classes and the means
thereto.”

To be introduced by the Bishops of London, Maine, and
Carlisle.

ὃ

224 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

WEDNESDAY, JULY 4th.
10.45 am. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel.

11.0 a.m.—1I.30 p.m.

Discussion of Subject (No. III.)\—*“ The Anglican ©
Communion in relation to the Eastern Churches, to the
Scandinavian and other Reformed Churches, to the old
Catholics and others.”

To be introduced by the Archbishop of Dublin, the Bishops
of Winchester, Gibraltar, Lichfield, Jamaica, and Bishop
Blyth.

2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m.

Discussion of Subject (No. IV.)— Polygamy of
Heathen Converts.—Divorce.”

To be introdued by the Bishops of Durham, Chester,
Zululand, The Niger, Maryland, and Bombay.

THURSDAY, JULY 5th.
10.45 am. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel.

[1.0 a.m.—I.30 p.m.

Discussion of Subject (No. V.)—‘“ Authoritative
Standards of Doctrine and Worship.”

To be introduced by the Bishops of Sydney, Aberdeen,
Western New York, Salisbury, and Albany.

2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m.

Discussion of Subject (No. VI.)—“ Mutual relations
of Dioceses and Branches of the Anglican Communion.”

To be introduced by the Bishops of Capetown, Brechin,
and Derry.

FRIDAY, JULY 6th.
10.45 am. Litany in Lambeth Palace Chapel.
11.0 a.m.—1I.30 p.m., and 2.0 p.m.—4.45 p.m.
Discussion of Subject (No. I.)—“ The Church's
4

Programme of Conference. 225

practical work in relation to (A) Intemperance. (B)
Purity. (C) Care of Emigrants. (D) Soctalism.”

To be introduced by (A) the Bishops of London and New
York ; (B) the Bishops of Durham and Calcutta ; (C)
the Bishops of Liverpool, North Queensland, and
Quebec ; (D) the Bishops of Manchester and Mississippi.

MONDAY, JULY oth, to SATURDAY, JULY 2151.

Meetings of the various Committees appointed
during the first week’s Sessions.

MONDAY, JULY 23rd, to FRIDAY, JULY 27th.

Sessions of Conference in Lambeth Palace Library
to receive and consider the Reports of the various
Committees. Litany, each day, in Chapel, at 10.45,
except on Wednesday, July 25th (S. James’ Day),
when there will be a celebration of Holy Communion
at 10.0 a.m.

SATURDAY, JULY 28th.

Ir am. * Concluding Service in St. Paul’s
Cathedral, with Sermon by the Archbishop of York.

At the services marked thus (*) the Bishops pre-
sent are requested to attend in their Episcopal Robes.
It is requested that each Bishop present at the ser-
vices in Westminster Abbey and St. Paul’s Cathedral
may be attended by one Chaplain (or Acting Chap-
lain) who will take a place in the procession. The
arrangements at Canterbury and at Lambeth Palace
will not admit of the attendance of any Chaplains.
If such Bishops (and Chaplains) as can conveniently
do so would go already robed to Westminster Abbey
and St. Paul’s, it would relieve the necessary pressure
upon the space available for robing. In the case of
the Lambeth Palace service, rooms will beset apart
for robing and unrobing—as Episcopal Robes will

226 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

not be worn during the Conference Debates. Pas-
toral Staves will in no case be carried except by
the Diocesans in whose Cathedrals the services are

held.

The rule found necessary at the former Con-
ferences will be again adopted—that should any
petitions or memorials be presented to the Con-
ference, they be placed without discussion in the
hands of the President ; and that it be understood
that no answer can in any case be returned.

EDW : CANTUAR.

C. J. GLOUCESTER & BRISTOL,
Episcopal Secretary.

RANDALL T. DAVIDSON,
(Dean of Windsor.) General Secretary:

B. F. SMITH,
(Archdeacon of Maidstone.) A ς sistan t Secretary.

June 23rd, 1888.

(2) LAMBETH CONFERENCE, 1888.

The following arrangements have now been made
in connection with the forthcoming Lambeth Con-
ference :—

1. In the debates of the opening week the formal
motion proposed will in each case be for the appoint-
ment of a Committee to consider the particular
subject, and to report in the closing week of the
Conference.

2. Certain Bishops conversant with the particular
subjects have been invited to open the several dis-

Programme of Conference. 227

cussions, but time will as far as possible be afforded
for the speeches of others who may wish to take part
in the opening debates.

3. It is requested that the names of Bishops who.
may be regarded as specially qualified to serve on
the different- Committees, may be handed to the
secretaries, either before or during the opening de-
bates, for the President’s consideration before the
Committees are nominated.

4. The invited speakers are requested, in opening
the discussions, to express their views by means of
speeches, not written papers, and it is particularly
hoped that no speech will exceed fifteen minutes in
duration, opportunity for fuller treatment of the
subjects being afforded in the discussions and
reports of the Committees.

5. A verbatim report of all the speeches will, as
before, be taken, and the transcript will be preserved
at Lambeth. No part of the debates will be open to
the public.

6. The rule found necessary at the former Con-
ferences will be again adopted—that, should any
petitions or memorials be presented to the Conference,
they be placed without discussion in the hands of the
President ; and that it be understood that no answers
can, in any case, be returned.

7. It is requested that each Bishop attending the
Services in Westminster Abbey and St. Paul’s Cathe-
dral may be attended by one Chaplain (or Acting
Chaplain), who will take a place in the procession.
The arrangements at Canterbury and at Lambeth’
Palace will not admit of the attendance of any
Chaplains.

EpDw. CANTUAR.
June 9th, 1888.

228 Lambeth Conference of 1888.
18}}}

In reply to enquiries from several Bishops as
to whether the red (“ Convocation”) chimere should
be worn by the Bishops attending the Lambeth
Conference Services, the Archbishop of Canterbury
has recommended that, for the sake of uniformity
and convenience, the dress worn by all the Bishops
should be the ordinary Episcopal Habit—black
chimere with lawn rochet and D.D. hood. Chap-
lains to wear cassock, surplice, hood and scarf.

LAMBETH PALACE,
25th June, 1888.

No. XXVIII. (See page 41.)

Sermon preached by the Archbishop of Canterbury,
in Westminster Abbey, on Monday Evening,
July 2, 1888. .

“All the body fitly framed and knit together through that
which every joint supplieth.”—EPH. iv. 16.

THE well-known words—so rich, so worthy, might
seem a motto for this Abbey in its glorious age.
But they are fitter to describe this Assembly in its
perfect modernness. They are the Christian view
of the facts of the Church’s growth—facts seen from
within. The structural progress of the organism is
what the Apostle notes.

The consequent changes in the surrounding world
are no less notable. Her materials of beauty and
strength, added to the new, are in a way subtracted |
from the old. Shaped and glorified and quickened
they are replaced at the service of the old. For the

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 220

Church is not a dead Temple quarried out of living
rock and leaving a chasm behind. It is still in the
world. A living Temple into which a half-dead
world is to be absorbed.

The world has abundant vitality to resent the
process. Hence, not only old persecutions, but all
antagonism, all dislike—save that large amount
which is drawn on us by our own inconsistencies.

Some thinking people still find it doubtful whether
the world will ever be absorbed by Christianity, as
Christ and the writers of the New Testament
evidently conceive that it will be.

But there was a time when greater thinkers still
would have held any theory of the unity of Man, to
be brought about by any cause whatever, irrational
and unnatural, an evident contradiction of all such
design as could be attributed to nature.

For instance, in the long and beautiful fragment
which remains to us of the Sixth Book of Cicero’s
greatest work—his treatise “ Of the Republic,”’—he
sketches the physical features of the distribution of
man on the globe. From the Milky Way he marks
in vision the few, the narrow, and the scattered
“patches” of the earth which were habitable—-the
waste, impassable tracts which severed the races of
mankind—the invincible impossibility of serviceable
communications. It is from these laws and cer-
tainties of nature, that he draws the lofty, melancholy
moral of the worthless narrowness of human fame.
“The Southern Zone bears absolutely no relation to
the condition of Europe. Even Europe has very little
nterest in the eyes of the humane world of Italy.”

This was the judgment of a mind open to all the
considerations which had hitherto suggested them-
selves in thought and literature. Yet a few years
later a society was summoned into existence whose
earliest call was to be “ Fishers of Men,” to gather
together in one ‘the children of God who were
scattered abroad.”

230᾽ Lambeth Conference of 1888.

The Statesman expressly affirms it to be “un-
imaginable that the mightiest Name from lands of
civilisation and culture should pass the eternal
barriers of Caucasus or be wafted over Ganges.” <A.
few years later the Apostle was writing of “Onc
Name to which every knee would bow.”

To the Christian it was in the nature of things
that scattered humanity should be welded into one
mass, and the uniting attraction be the human
Name of Jesus. The Oneness of Humanity is the
essence of the Faith. The One Body not yet “ fitly
framed together,” but, as the Apostle literally wrote,
“framing itself together,’ as by an hourly process, is
the Ideal to which all work, all energies should be
directed. This includes and involves every impulse,
every labour of the Church. This is the sum of her
self-offering to the Glory of the Father.

The Church looks very far forward and very far
behind. Missions, which in all the pressure of their:
necessity are upon us now, are but one step. The
consolidating and compacting of what has been long -
converted is a parallel, a continuous, a greater work.
Missions have known long pauses in their progress—
how long was that which followed the conversion of
England—centuries in which unchristian races lay
about Christendom and threatened its existence.
If Missions are vital, the conservation of Christianity
within our populations and the confederation of
Christian populations are no less of a necessity
for the Kingdom of God, and manifestly no less a
difficulty.

It has been pretended that the development of the
Anglican communion springs rather from the exten-
sion of our race than from the energy of our faith.
It would indeed be difficult to outrun the race-wave
which now sweeps all shores. Yet there are boun-
teous archipelagos, populous tropic wildernesses,
primeval churches in peril among the heathen, where
the English or American missioner’s is the only house-

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 231

hold which belongs to our race. And were it
otherwise, the mission spirit is at least now eminently
characteristic of the blood. Southern Europe had
been drawn out earlier, through its natural contact
with the East, and the struggles at home kept our
efforts low. With the Reformation came one touch to
our national conscience. Our Elizabethan mariners
dedicating continents to Christ, witness in some
measure to a consciousness that Gospel and Church
were gifts to beimparted. Yet it ought to sting us to
think that it is but a century since England found
in her heart to give her America a bishop; but a
century since our convict ships landed their terrible
freight in Australia, with no more spiritual comforters
than the musketeers. Alas! it is not ninety years since
we first began to repay the precious earthly things
of either Africa or Asia with a share in our spiritual
things. Would that it were more possible than it is
to identify the extension of our race with that of our
faith. Yet signs do still follow the footsteps of them
that believe ; and new churches are forming new
nations even as we were formed. Higher ideas
of the basis of society, of the marriage union, of
family life, of self-restraint, of truthfulness, not only
lift the individual but form the people. A recog-
nised commercial morality, an even administration
of justice, a conscience in dealing with subject races,
public action on principles not merely selfish, the
devotion of lives to benevolent causes, are things
found under Christian Governments, and scarcely
looked for elsewhere. Independent witnesses avow
these to be direct results of Christian faith, and the
growth of national character through these, far more
than numbers of adherents, or prevalence of obser-
vances, assures us that the Church is still the nurse
of nations.

We know the need of caution—how we may
enervate native churches by nursing them too long
or wreck them by launching them too soon; we

232 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

know that diversity of development according to the
genius of the races is essential to their vitality ; we
know isolation may peril unity, and independence
risk disintegration ; still we know how Church life
fostered our own early nationality, how the recovery
of a national Church awoke all the force and fire of
our national spirit, and we long to see many dormant
peoples born to the world, by being born to Christ.

Surely we draw near to the threshold of an era
in which the fulfilment of such hopes will come.
What the Roman vision saw as wild wastes round a
few centres of light, are now old empires. Those
empires are small regions compared with the wastes
into which the overflowing peoples stream onward,
miles in a day; those overflowing peoples are few
compared with the dark races which once were
thought born for slavery either in their old homes
or their new—few compared with the labour-popula-
tions that surge up on many shores, or even with the
utterly new-born half-races owned and disowned both
by East and West. Will not all these follow the old
lines of history? Will not these be empires to which
what we have called colossal will be pigmy ? And the
Church of Christ, if she has a mission to any, has a
mission to all. What tremendous issues! If she
meets them, the Church history of the past is a mere
preface to the volume.

Or think of the countries where Commerce, taking
the field at once with capital and labour at com-
mand, founds harbours and marts great and fair
as the old world’s. Step by step with their creation,
their redemption, we think, may keep pace. Where
resources, where energies are practically unlimited
the spirit, we think, will not fail. Nor does it. But
side by side with all, arise the old world’s problems
in all their pain and perplexity. The old world’s
quarrels are perpetuated, when their origins, which
᾿ gave them some sad dignity, are forgotten and grown
meaningless. If spreading churches glory to be part

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 233

and parcel with us, and we with them, we pray them
at least to forget English divisions, and to be at such
unity among themselves that rays from their circle
may be focussed here.

Two such enterprises might seem vocation enough
—to form peoples that are no peoples into the one
people of God—and to weld into affectionate religion
the new-born communities of commerce. But there
is a third worthy to rank with the other two—namely,
to win to the cross the fully-organised civilisations of
remote antiquity which are saturated with religious
feeling. Of those primeval religions the root con-
viction is one of three. Either self-sacrifice on the
part of God is inconceivable ; or the Incarnation of
a God is in quest of a higher or lower pleasure ; or
else there is no personality in heaven or earth which
is worth the keeping. Were it not worth all we are
or have if we could contribute aught to dispel such
dire glooms and substitute the certainties that there
is no sacrifice which God has not made for man; that
the Incarnation means an eternity of love for all
humanity ; that we shall for ever be ourselves, yet
rising from glory to glory.

Within the bosom of Christendom itself lie pro-
blems no less strange. While distant difficulties call
only for faithful activity on the part of our own
churches, the nearest questions are the hardest, the
nearest duties most dim and indistinct. There is the
inevitable reformation—or inevitable decline in the
faith—of some western populations. There is the
revival of languid and oppressed churches in things
that belong to divine knowledge, morals, spiritual
diligence. Some churches are in danger of absorp-
tion; some have “fought” and “almost devoured
one another;” some rival even Israel itself in
dispersion and in tenacity; in some the clerical
order includes the most enlightened and the rudest
of the community; in some, a yearning to undeceive
the people of gross superstitions is crushed by a

234 < Lambeth Conference of 1888.

forbidding fear of yielding up outworks which seem
like a fence of Faith. Intrude we may not: yet we
can still less refuse to touch such burdens with a
finger, and look on prayerless and unsympathising.

The ages lengthen out apace. The work of Christ
is not accomplished. The world judges by results.
That matters not if it be the Master’s will that His
chariot drive heavily; that the salvation of the
Gentiles linger, and the unity of man tarry. But do
we think it is so? or are we conscious of causes
purely human, of wills and factions that despise
peace ?

Yet the movement is onward though the pace is
halting. Tremblingly yet rejoicingly we do believe
that new charities blossom from our differences. The
attitude of an opponent now is almost always an
attitude of respect. The asperities of the present
are almost milder than the forbearance of the past.
Affection between advocates of mutually destructive
views is no unreal or unwonted thing. If rougher
tests of progress are of value, much more so is the
prevalence of a spirit which makes characteristic
diversities not merely tend towards truce, but lean
longingly towards unity. For this, beyond question,
is the working of the Spirit of Christ.

If we look back now for causes which have pro-
moted this growing unity of spirit, we find it in the
activity of those forces which rescue, which teach,
which guide, which comfort, which raise, which feed,
which warm. Whatever outside of Christianity does
these works, does Christ’s work.

The forces which are set forth in Christ’s two
Sacraments and in the two Apostolic rites of Confir-
mation and Ordination are these. They are the
forces that cleanse, and bind together; that strengthen,
and organize for growth. On the contrary the spirit
of Regulation—the intrusive meddling spirit which
travesties the spirit of Order—whether it exhibit
itself in minute prescription or minute litigation—

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 235

the spirit (to speak plainly) of so many Councils
since the earliest, has been often the apple of discord,
and often the germ of schisms.

I. The energy which within the Church has in our
times revived the courage and increased the activity
of our peoples, which has added continents and
islands to the conquests of the faith ; the attraction
which has held together many elements of division,
and even welded them into strong instruments of
work, has been found again and again to reside in
those Strong Centres which Apostles designed for this
very function of assigning work to all, and stimu-
lating the zeal of all. Natural analogies are perhaps
not mere resemblances, but the same laws of God.
In our own national history at any rate, and in the
history of the Churches, we find ourselves well
warned to keep our Christian groupings wide enough,
and our centres strong enough. Strong by position
to traverse, to learn from, to influence each rank and
class by turns; strong in councils of men, sufficiently
versed in the world’s thought and experience, habitu-
ally taught by devotional lives to refer daily ques-
tions to eternal principles; faithful to administer and
to apply far reaching organizations for the benefit of
the bodies and minds and spirits of men. Through
this strong system, however short of its ideal, still an
ideal influence has been exercised within Christian
society, and by that society on all surrounding
powers.

The very errors that have been made have tested
it. When every petty city of Africa had its bishop
and the doctrine of episcopacy was strongest, the
effectiveness of the episcopate was lowest. A Cyprian
had no difficulty in obtaining their unanimous vote,
a vote contrary to Scripture principle, Church tradi-
tion, and the subsequent ruling of the Catholic word—
a vote that heretical or schismatical baptism was void.

Vigour and character were not in hand for so many
posts of leaders. Poly-episcopacy ceased to be epis-

236 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

copacy when the diocese became so small a unit.
When every civil district in Phrygia and Galatia
became a see, failing such an imperial will as Cy-
prian’s to unite them, their controversies became,
according to St. Paul’s forecast, internecine. The
like multiplication in Italy converted churches into
cliques, and delivered Italy over to the one strong
see, and Europe followed the leading country.

Half a century with us has seen seven colonial
sees grow to seventy, and so vast still is their area,
that another half-century will not be too long to
work out the sub-division. Yet the old policy of
England must be nowhere forgotten, that sub-division
should cease before dioceses become too small for the
influence of each to radiate through all, before the
administration anywhere becomes so narrow as to
represent only local patriotism.

II. Yet strong central forces are not all that is
required to prevent a merely larger congregationalism
from supplanting the catholic system. Much has
been said, done, tested, which shows that these times
demand supplementary organizations. We should
lack either courage or intelligence if we did not
admit it. The three-fold ministry is complete in
itself for its own great ends. The seals of its
origin are patent. But outside those ends are
many functions to which it is not adapted. The
long attempt to adapt it brings out the inadequacy.
From the Apostolic text of the Epistles down to the
last Parochial Report of any well worked district
we see how much energy and blessing lives in other
orders in the Church. There is a vast reservoir of
devotion truly ministerial, which cannot possibly
discharge itself through that triple channel. We
have on a small scale the partial Dedication of lay-
reading, school-teaching, visiting, “ Church-work,”
as it is called, at large. Very precious are these.
All of them practical uses of Spiritual Gifts. No-
thing less, But it is confessed that the whole Anglican

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury, 237

group is weak in the life of sisterhoods, and brother-
hoods, and “ armies,” as, when well trained, they may
be not unfitly called. The self-devotion of such
auxiliaries, as they elsewhere exist, is not less, but
more, absorbing than that of the ministry itself.
One church there is which candour places beyond
praise for the ceaseless multitudinous self-surrender
of men to energetic life-work, without fee or reward,
without property or domestic life. They multiply
infinitely the effectiveness of the ministry. Say that
that Church is careless of pure doctrine or ignorant
of Scripture Truth ; that makes the facts still more
marked for us, if Truth suggests sacrifice for the
Truth, or for the souls that want the Truth. Here
with us they would be, not as of old foreign influ-
ences set against the organization of diocese and
parish, but as already in these beginnings dependent
on both, and part of both, and their main work the
carrying of the Gospel into unreached places. What
is the reason that they are missing? Have abuses
created an eternal prejudice against the thing abused ?
Have we no confidence in our own safeguards?
Have we cut down the oak to kill the ivy? Orare
the centres we spoke of not now strong enough to
take additional strain? Or is there force, but no
material for it to lay hold upon ?

Or may we think there is indeed ἃ gradual
deepening of spiritual yearnings, a gradual leavening
of spiritual men into readiness to reply, “ Here I
am; send me,’ when the voice is heard from the
throne, “Whom shall we send, and who will go
for us?”

I incline from some signs, even from the safe-
guards themselves, to think this is the account of our
position. There are flecks of glory along our horizon,
and they surely are lights of dawn, not relics of
sunset.

But the beginning must be in some real, definite
spritual conquest. Let such a trained band complete

538 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

the virtual Christianisation of a town or district here,
er among our fellow-subjects in India, or work the
conversion of such an untouched land as the Corea,
and a new impulse would strike every home and
foreign mission. Men would wonder then not at the
smallness, but the largeness of what had been done
hitherto with such slight forces. They would wonder
still more that Church life had rolled on so many
days without auxiliaries, almost without voluntary
forces.

III. “ Some spiritual conquest,” I said. The word
“spiritual” must be the keynote of all we do,
say, think about the Church’s daily new-born work.
The spirit makes itself a body to dwell in. All
needed material help would wait upon a spiritual
outburst as ever of old.

“Ye are built upa spiritual house.” Spiritual yet
built. Built but remaining spiritual.

Prophets and Apostles foresaw all worldly material
brought and built into it. Yet it was to remain
spiritual. When it ceases to be so it is no more
the building which will bear the Trial and the Fire.

We know well that spiritual life may be real
without apostolic form. Only we seem to see that,
even in its most beautiful and manifold manifesta-
tions, it cannot without that form propagate itself
indefinitely. Time after time spiritual varieties
surrender their separate life and merge into the
completer existence.

On the other hand, we know well, that there
may be apostolic form without spiritual life, and
that like any other form that lacks life, its end is to
break up and supply pabulum for lower forms of life.

Our own humble, hopeful confidence, lies in the
possession of apostolic form with fervent spiritual
charity and living faith. The form is secured. Our
every-day vigilance must be for the spiritual anima-
tion, the spiritual “increase of every part in that
which every joint supplieth.”

Sermon of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 230

An unworldly church, an unworldly clergy, means
not a poor church or poverty-stricken clergy. A
poor, unprovided, dependent clergy is scarcely able
to be an unworldly one, and certainly cannot betoken
an unworldly laity. A laity which breaks the bread
of its ministers into smaller and smaller fragments,
and has none of the divine will to multiply, works
no miracle and has no honour.

Unworldliness is not emptiness of garners, but the
right and noble use of garners filled by God. An
unworldly clergy is not a clergy without a world, but
one which knows the world, uses and teaches man
how to use the world for God until it brings at last |
the whole world home to God.

Never more necessary than now to use the world
as not abusing it. To abuse it gracefully is the
temptation of the age—and to gild the abuse with
philanthropy. The philanthropy of the Gospel
without its philotheism is popular. But its philan-
thropy will never live without its philotheism, any more
than the form of a church will live without the spirit.

To say “Christianity is not a Theology” is in |
one sense true, because Christianity is a Life. But
it would be just as true to say Christianity is-not a
History, or Christianity is not a worship. But you
cannot have the Life without the Worship, without
the History, or without the Theology. The spiritual
life is the Life of God. As material life has its
science of Biology, so has spiritual life its science of
Theology. Without Theology, Christian Life will
have no intellectual, no spiritual expression, as with-
out Worship it will have no emotional expression,
without History no continuous development. Intel-
lectual expression is necessary to the Propagation
and so to the Permanence of the Faith. To know
it is the profession of the clergyman, and the most
living interest of the cultured layman.

Let us, the whole world over, where the common
speech is spoken, the common prayer prayed, the

240 Lambeth Conference of τ888. ᾿

Scripture open, keep touch with each other, firm,
inseparable—find all the points of contact that we
can honestly with them that are in a way separate ;
yet not risk our greater unity for the sake of smaller
ones.

To me it seems no fancy— it is none I trust to you
—that the triple voice we have caught to-night is the
very harmony that swells on our inner ear from roof
and aisle and sanctuary. Here where the historic
past “lives in the living present;” here, where
greatest, best, and sweetest are honoured so in death
that in a parable their shadow may fall on some οἵ.
us ; here, where in never pausing procession sweep
onward Parliaments of Law, Councils of Faith,
Divine Orators, princely marriages, funerals with
sorrow of nations, commemorations, consecrations,
coronations—the Jubilee with its beloved Queen, its
lost Emperor ; here, where Edward the Confessor
bids Englishmen and English tribes never forget
that the ideal State is the Church, and the ideal
Church is the State, here, methinks, we well may lay
to heart this threefold voice.

Strong central forces: how infinitely greater their
operation and their impulse, than if distributed into
the most symmetric minor nuclei. Their very power |
to attract, to move, to lift, to quicken, is their own
concentredness.

Again. How we learn from this great Abbey the
value of organizations that lie off the direct line of
action. It is the grandest organic centre, yet it
stands detached, favouring, labouring for every good
cause, yet freely on its own account. Differing even
in plan and structure radically from every sanctuary
in the land, it is the symbol of all those forces which
work not subordinated but in alliance. It confirms
by separateness.

Once more. No soul was ever lowered by the
sight of this wondrous fabric into material thoughts.
No man ever failed to see, read, hear its witnesses to

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 241

things spiritual. From mysterious triforium to
roadside porch “the stone cries out of the wall, and
the beam of the timber answers it; ‘Put not your
trust in man, nor in any child ot man.’ ‘Come up
here, and I will show thee things that must be
hereafter.’ ”

And-is not this the very auditory that is tuned
to the key of this house of power and _ holiness.
From zones which the Roman Seer declared could
never help or heed each other come the chiefs of the
Church to consult in one love for the welfare of all
men,—how they may “make all men see” the
intellectual, the spiritual light of the world, and the
perfect law of liberty. Lightly borne across barriers
which he said “No Name could ever overleap,” they
cume with no strength no pretension of their own ;
but in the strength of One Name to which every
knee shall bow, a strength perfected in our weakness.

May we catch the inspiration of the hour, the
place, the Name. Then may we work out our work ;
strengthen our centres of force ; throw out organi-
sations which will penetrate society, poor and great ;
flood every corner of our house with spiritual light ;
have nothing cold and “no part dark,’—* the whole
body full of light” and. of warm blood. This
is the very hope set before us, that we “ may grow
into Him in all things, which is the Head—even
Christ.”

No. XXIX. (See page 42.)

. Sermon preached by Bishop Whipple, of Minnesota,
in Lambeth Palace Chapel, on Tuesday, July
3, 1888.

Most Reverend and Right Reverend Brethren,—
No assembly is fraught with such awful responsibility
to God as acouncil of the Bishops of His Church.

242 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Since the Holy Spirit presided in the first council of
Jerusalem, faithful souls have looked with deep
interest to the deliberations of those whom Christ
has made the shepherds of His flock, and to whom
He gave His promise, “ Lo, I am with you always to
the end of the world.” The responsibility is greater
when division has marred the beauty of the Lamb’s
Bride. Our words and acts will surely hasten or
(which God forbid) retard the reunion of Christen-
dom. Feeling the grave responsibility which is
imposed on me to-day, my heart cries out as did the
prophet’s, “1 ama child and cannot speak.” Pray for
me, venerable brethren, that God may help me to
obey His word—‘“ Whatsoever I command, that shalt
thou speak.” I would kneel with you at our Master’s
feet and pray that “the Holy Spirit may guide us
in all truth.’ We meet as the representatives of
national Churches; each with its own peculiar re-
sponsibility to God for the souls intrusted to its care ;
each with all the rights of a national Church, to
adapt itself to the varying conditions of human
society ; and each bound to preserve the order, the
faith, the sacraments, and the worship of the Catholic
Church, for which it is a trustee. As we kneel by
the table of our common Lord we remember
separated brothers. Division has multiplied division
until infidelity sneers at Christianity as an effete
superstition, and the modern Sadducee, more bold
than his Jewish brother, denies the existence of God.
Millions for whom Christ died have not so much as
heard that there is a Saviour. It will heal no divi-
sion to say, Who is at fault? The sin of schism does
not lie at one door. If one has sinned by self-will,
the other has sinned as deeply by lack of charity and
love. The way to reunion looks difficult. To man
it isimpossible. No human eirenicon can bridge the
gulf of separation. There are unkind words to be
taken back, alienations to be healed, and _heart-
burnings to be forgiven. When we are blind,

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 243

God can make away. When “the God of Peace”
rules in all Christian hearts, our Lord’s prayer will
be answered—*“ That they all may be one, as Thou,
Father, art in Me, and I in Thee that they all may
be one in Us, that the world may believe that thou
hast sent Me.” No one branch of the Church is
absolutely by itself alone the Catholic Church; all
branches need reunion in order to the completeness
of the Church. There are blessed signs that the
Holy Spirit is quickening Christian hearts to seek
for unity. We all know that this divided Christianity
cannot conquer the world. At atime when every
form of error and sin is banded together to oppose
the kingdom of Christ, the world needs the witness
of a united Church. Men must hear again the voice
which peals through the lapse of centuries bearing
witness to “ the faith once delivered to the saints,” or
else for many souls there will be only rationalism
and unbelief—while this sad, weary world, so full of
sin and sorrow, is pleading for help, it is a wrong to
Christ and to the souls for whom He died that His
children should be separated in rival folds. As
baptized into Christ we are brothers. Notwithstand-
ing the hedges of human opinions which men have
builded in the garden of the Lord, all who look for
salvation alone through faith in Jesus Christ do hold ©
the great verities of Divine faith. The opinions
which separate us are not necessary to be believed in
order to salvation. The truths in which we agree
are parts of the Catholic faith. The Holy Spirit has
passed over these human barriers, and set his seal to
the labours of separated brethren in Christ, and
rewarded them in the salvation of many precious
souls. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the
renewing and sanctifying influences of the Holy
Ghost are the same in the peasant in the cottage and
in the emperor on the throne. They share with us
in the long line of confessors and martyrs for Christ.
We would not rob them of one sheaf which they

244 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

have gathered in the garner of the Lord. We rejoice
that Churches with a like historic lineage with us are
seeking reunion, Churches whose faith has been
dimmed by coldness or clouded by errors are being
quickened into new life from the Incarnate Son
of God.

Our hearts go out in loving sympathy to the
Old Catholics of Europe and America, whose names
always will be linked with Selwyn, Wilberforce, and
Wordsworth, Whittingham, Kerfoot, and Brown, in
defence of the faith. It is with deep sorrow that we
remember that the Church of Rome has separated
herself from the teaching of the primitive Church by
additions to the faith once delivered to the saints,
and by claiming for its Bishop prerogatives which
belong only to the Divine Head of the Church.
While we honour the devotion and zeal of her mis-
sionary heroes, and rejoice at the good work of
multitudes of her children, we lament that lack of
charity which anathematises disciples of Christ who
have carried the Gospel to the ends of the earth.

We bless God’s Holy Name for the fraternal
work which has been carried on under the guidance
of the see of Canterbury, and which we trust will
lead ancient Churches toa deeper personal faith in
Jesus Christ.

We are sad that some of our kinsmen in Christ,
children of one mother, have forsaken her ways.
God can over-rule even this sorrow, so that it shall
fall out to the furtherance of the Gospel. They
must take with them precious memories of the love
and the faith of the mother whom they have for-
saken, and of the liberty wherewith the truth in
Christ has made her children free—under God these
may be a link in the chain of His providence to the
restoration of unity. It is a ‘singular providence
that at this period of the world’s history, when mar-
vellous discoveries have united the people of divers
tongues in common interests, He has placed the

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 245

Anglo-Saxon race in the forefront of the nations.
They are carrying civilisation to the ends of the
earth. They are bringing liberty to the oppressed,
elevating the down-trodden, and are giving to all these
divers tongues and kindreds their customs, traditions,
and laws. I reverently believe that the Anglo-
Saxon Church has been preserved by God’s Provi-
dence (if her children will accept this Mission) to
heal the divisions of Christendom, and lead on in His
work to be done in the eventide of the world. She
holds the truths which underlie the possibility of re-
union, the validity of all Christian baptism in the Name
of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. She
administers the two sacraments of Christ as of per-
petual obligation, and makes faith in Jesus Christ,
as contained in the Catholic Creed, a condition of
Christian fellowship. The Anglo-Saxon Church
does not perplex men with theories and shibboleths
which many a poor Ephraimite cannot speak—
she believes in God the Father Almighty, Maker of
heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son,
and in the Holy Ghost, three Persons and one God,
but she does not weaken faith in the Triune God
by human speculations about the Trinity in Unity.
She believes that. the sacred Scriptures were written
by inspiration of God, but she has no theory about
inspiration. She holds up the Atonement of Christ
as the only hope of a lost world; but she has no
philosophy about the Atonement. She teaches that
it is through the Holy Ghost that men are united to
Christ. She ministers the sacraments appointed by
Christ as His channels of grace; but she has no
theory to explain the manner of Christ’s presence to
penitent believing souls. She does not explain what
God has not explained, but celebrates these Divine
mysteries, as they were held and celebrated for
one thousand years after our Lord ascended into
heaven, before there was any East or West arrayed
against each other in the Church of God. Surely

246 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

we may and ought to be first to hold up the olive-
branch of peace over strife, and say, “Sirs, ye are
brethren.” ;

In so grave a matter as the restoration of organic
unity, we may not surrender anything which is of
Divine authority, or accept terms of communion
which are contrary to God’s Word. We cannot
recognise any usurpation of the rights and preroga-
tives of national Churches which have a common
ancestry, lest we “heal the hurt of the daughter of
my people slightly,’ and say “ peace where there is
no peace;” but we do say that all which is temporary
and of human choice or preference we will forego
from our love to our own kinsmen in Christ.

The Church of the Reconciliation will be an
historical and Catholic Church in its ministry, its
faith, and its sacraments. It will inherit the promises
of its Divine Lord. It will preserve all which is
Catholic and Divine. It will adopt and use all in-
strumentalities of any existing organisation which
will aid it in doing the Lord’s work. It will put
away all which is individual, narrow, and sectarian.
It will concede to all who hold the faith all the
liberty wherewith Christ hath made His children
free.

Missions.—In the presence of brethren who bear
-in their bodies the marks of the Lord Jesus, I hardly
know how toclothe in words my thoughts as I speak
of Missions. The providence of God has broken |
down impenetrable barriers—the doors of hermit
nations have been opened ; commerce has bound
men in common interests, and so prepared “a high-
way for our God”—Japan, India, China, Africa,
Polynesia, amid the solitudes of the icy north, and in
the lands of tropic suns, world-wide there are signs
of the coming of the kingdom of Jesus Christ. The
veil which has so long blinded the eyes of the ancient
people, our Lord’s kinsmen according to the flesh, is
being taken away. We bless God for the good

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 247

example of martyrs like Patteson, Mackenzie, Parker,
Hannington, and others, who have laid down their
lives for the Lord Jesus. We rejoice that our branch
of the Church has been counted worthy to add to
the names of those who “came out of great tribula-
tion, and have washed their robes and made them
white in the blood of the Lamb.” “A great and
effectual door is opened.” There is no country on
the earth where we may not carry the Gospel. The
wealth of the world is largely in Christian hands.
The Church only needs faith to grasp the opportu-
nity to do the work.

In the presence of fields so white for the harvest,
we must ask, “Lord what wilt Thou have me to do?”

1. There must be unceasing, prevailing intercessory
prayer for those whom we send out to heathen
lands. The hearts of all Christian nations were
turned with anxious solicitude to that brave servant
of God and his country in Khartoum. Shall we
feel less for the servants of Christ who have given
up home and country to suffer and it may be to die
for Him? Someof us remember that when Missions
were destroyed, when clouds were all around us, and
the very ground drifted from under our feet, that we
were made brave to work and wait for the salvation
of God by the prayers which went up to God for us.
When “prayers were made without ceasing of the
Church unto God,” the fast-closed doors of the prison
were opened for the Apostle. It will be so again.

2. There must be the entire consecration of all
unto Christ. The wisdom of Paul and the eloquence
of Apollos may plant, but “God alone giveth the
increase.’ If success comes, if “the rod of the
priesthood bud and blossom and bear fruit,” it must
be “laid up in the ark of God.” He will not give His
glory to another. The work is Christ’s. “We are
ambassadors for Him.” “I have chosen you and
siege you that ye should go and bring forth
ruit.”

248 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

3. They who would win souls must have a ripe
knowledge of the sacred Scriptures. “They were
written by inspiration of God ... . that the man of
God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all
good works.” Our orders may be unquestioned, our
doctrine perfect in every line and feature, but we
shall not reach the hearts of men unless we preach
Christ out of an experimental knowiedge of the
truths of Divine Revelation. There is but one Book
which can bring light to homes of sorrow, one light
to scatter clouds and darkness, one message to lead
wandering folk unto God. This blessed Book will
be to every weary soldier and lonely missionary
what it was to Livingstone dying alone in Africa, or
to Captain Gardiner dead on the desolate shores of
Patagonia, whose finger pointed to the words, “ The
blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin.”

4. We must love all whom Christ loves. We
may have the gift of teaching, we may understand
all mysteries, we may have all knowledge, we may
bestow all our goods to the poor, we may even give
our bodies to be burned, but without that love which
comes alone from Christ, we shall be “as sounding
brass and a tinkling cymbal.” With St. Paul we
must say, “ Whereinsoever Christ is preached I do
rejoice, and will rejoice.” ©

5. Above all gifts we need the baptism of the
Holy Ghost. When ¢4zs consecration comes there
will be no cry of an empty treasury. We shall no
longer be weary with the bleating of lost sheep, to
whom we have to say, I have no means and no
shepherd to send you.

Christian Work.--We rejoice at every sign that
Christians realise that wealth is a sacred trust, for
which they shall give an account. We rejoice more
that they are giving that personal service which is a
law of His Kingdom. Men and women of culture
and gentle birth are going into the abodes of sickness
and sorrow to comfort stricken homes and lead

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 249

sinful folk to the Saviour. Brotherhoods, sisterhoods,
and deaconesses are multiplying. Never was there
greater need for their holy work. Many of our own
baptized children have drifted away from all faith.
To thousands God is a name, the Bible a tradition,
faith an opinion, and heaven and hell fables. But
that which gives us the deepest sadness and makes
all Christian work more difficult is that so many of
those to whom the people look for example have.
given up the Bible, the Lord’s Day, the house of
God, and Christian faith. Alas! they are telling
these weary toilers whose lives are clouded by anxiety
and sorrow that there is no hereafter. “ They know
not what they do.” They are sowing to the wind and
will reap the whirlwind. May God show them the
danger before it is too late. he loss of faith is the
loss of everything; without it morality becomes
prudence or imprudence. When the tie which bends
man to God is broken all other ties snap asunder.
No nation has survived the loss of its religion. We
are appalled at the mad cry of anarchy which
tramples all which we hold dear for time and eternity
under its feet. We cannot look into its face without
seeing the lineaments of that man of sin who
“opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is
called God and worshipped.” Antichrist is he who
usurps the place of Christ. “ He is antichrist who
denieth the Father and the Son.” Our hearts go
out in pity for those whose mechanical ideas of the
universe may be ἃ revolt from a mechanical
theology which has lost sight of the Fatherhood
of God. We stand where two ways meet. We
shall take care of the people or the people will take
care of us. The people are the rulers ; the power of
the future is in their hands. Limit their horizon to
this life, let penury, sickness, and sorrow change the
man toa wolf, let him know no God and Father
Who hears his cry, no Saviour to help, no brother to
bind up his wounds, let there be on the one side
R

250 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

wealth and luxury and wanton waste, and on the
other side poverty, misery, and despair—there will
be, as there has been, acry for blood. We wonder why
men pass by the Church to found clubs and brother-
hoods and orders. They will have them, and they
ought to have them, until the Church is in its Divine
love what its Founder designed it to be—the brother-
hood in Christ of the children of our God and
Father. What the world needs to-day is not alms,
not hospitals, not homes of mercy alone. It needs
the spirit and the power of the love of Christ. It
needs the voice, the ear, the hand, and the heart of
Christ seen in and working in His children. No
powers of government, no prestige of social position,
no prerogatives of Churchly authority can meet the
issues of this hour ; we have waited already too long.
Brotherhood men will have, and it will be the brother-
hood of the commune, or brotherhood in Christ as
the children of our God and Father. Infidelity
answers no questions, heals no wounds, fulfils no hopes.
The Gospel will do, is doing, to-day what it has done
through all the ages, leading men out of sin and.
darkness and despair to the liberty of sons of God.
In a day of division and unrest there will be
many questions which perplex earnest souls. Some
will dwell on the subjective side of the faith, others
will think most of its manifestations in the life.
These questions will affect organisation for Christian
work, public worship, and find expression in the
ritual of the Church. There is no room for differences
if Christ be first, Christ be last, and Christ in every-
thing. The ritual of the Church must be the expres-
sion of her life. It must symbolise her faith ; it must
be subject to her authority. As the years go by
worship will be more beautiful. The “garments of
the king’s daughter may be of wrought gold,” and she
“clothed in raiment of needlework,” but “she will
have a name that she liveth and is dead,” unless her
“fine linen is the righteousness of the saints.” Lastly,

Sermon of the Bishop of Minnesota. 251

to none is this council so dear as to those whose lives
are spent in the darkness of heathenism, or who have
gone out to new lands to lay foundations for the
work of the Church of God. In loneliness, with
deferred hopes, neglected by brethren, your only
refuge to cry as a child to God, it is a joy for you to
feel the beating of a brother’s heart, and hear the
music of a brother’s voice, and kneel with brothers
at the dear old trysting-place, the table of our Lord.
Let us consecrate all we have and are to Him,
let us remember loved ones far away, let us gather
all the work we have so long garnered in our hearts
and lay it at His feet. We shall not have met in vain
if out of the love learned of Him we give each to
other, and to all fellow-labourers for Him, a brother’s
love, a brother’s sympathy, and a brother’s prayers. _
I donot know how to clothe in words the thronging
memories which cluster around us in this holy place,
what searchings of heart, what cries to God, what
communions with Christ, what consolations of the
Holy Spirit have been witnessed in this sacred place.
I cannot call over the long roll of saints, confessors,
and martyrs, whose “names are written in the Lamb’s
Book of Life.” Two names will be remembered to-day
by us all. One, that gentle Archbishop Longley, who
in the greatness of his love saw with a prophet’s eye the
Mission of the Church, and planned these conferences
that our hearts might beat as one in the battle of the
last time. The other, the wisest of counsellors and
the most loving of brethren, the great-hearted Arch-
bishop Tait, whose dying legacy to his brethren was
“love one another.” They have finished their course
and entered into rest. A little more work,a few more
trials, and we, too, shall finish our course. We are
not two companies, the militant and triumphant are
one. We are the advance and rear of one host
travelling to the Canaan of God’s rest. God grant
that we, too, may so follow Christ that we may have
an abundant entrance to His eternal kingdom.
R.2

252 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No. XXX. (See page 45.)

Address to the Queen. Signed by the Bishops present
at the Third Lambeth Conference, July, 1888.

May it please Your Majesty,

We, Archbishops and Bishops, gathered together
at Lambeth from every part of Your Majesty’s
Dominions, from the United States of America, and
from Mission Fields in all quarters of the World,
desire respectfully to convey to Your Majesty an
assurance of the earnest prayer which we offer to
Almighty God, through our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ, that health, peace, and prosperity may rest
upon Your Majesty,and upon every Member of Your
Royal House.

Met as we are, in the Providence of God, to con-
sider how we may best promote among men an
increase of the Christian Faith, of brotherly kindness,
of honesty and pureness of life, and of reverence for
all that is good, we would express to Your Majesty
our grateful sense of the debt which we owe to the
beneficent influence of Your Majesty’s Court and
Home during the fifty years of a great and glorious
reign.

In thanking God for the rapid and continuous
extension of the Anglican Church in Your Majesty's

Address to the Queen. 253

Kingdom and Empire, and in the vast Continent of
America, we cannot forget the constant evidence
which has been given of Your Majesty’s earnest sym-
pathy with all efforts to promote whatsoever things
are true and pure and of good report, or tend to
advance among the nations of the earth the Kingdom
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

We are well assured that Your Majesty unites with
us in thanksgivings to Almighty God for the progress
already vouchsafed to His Church on earth, and in

continued prayer for the Divine blessing.

Edw. Cantuar.

W. Ebor.

R. Armagh.

Plunket Dublin.

F. Londin.

J. Fredericton.

Edward R. Calcutta.

R. Rupertsland.

W. P. Guiana.

W. W. Capetown.

Alfred Sydney.

J. B. Dunelm.

J. Hereford.

H. A. Neely (Maine).

H. Carlisle.

C. P. Meath.

Jno. Moosonee.

William Stevens
Bishop of Iowa.

E. H. Winton.

W. Basil St. Davids.

Allan B. Grahamstown.

Perry,

George H. North Queensland.

J. M. Rangoon.

R. Llandaff.

W. C. Peterborough.
G. Columbia.
Maurice S. Huron.

John Mitchinson, Bp.

William Derry & Raphoe.

Chas. M. Clogher.

H. B. Whipple,
Minnesota.

L. G. Bombay.

R. S. Colombo.

E. Dover.

C. J. Gloucester and Bristol.

E. Lincoln.

J. M. Trav. and Cochin.

Wm. B. Killaloe.

A. Colchester.

John Sarum.

J. J. Penrith.

Alfred Marlborough.

Alwyne Ely.

E. G. Sierra Leone.

Robert S. Cork.

Samuel Kilmore.

G. F. Popham Blyth, Bishop
in Jerusalem and the East.

Cyprian Saskatchewan and
Calgary.

J. C. Bangor.

E. Jamaica.

Andrew Burn Nelson, N.Z.

ἘΝ H. Exon.

Bishop of

254

F. Nova Scotia.

Edw. Bickersteth, Bishop ἃ in
Japan.

Charles P. Scott, Bishop in
North China.

C. W. Gibraltar.

J. Manchester.

W. T. T. Brisbane.

Edward C. Waiapu.

W. D. Lichfield.

C. J. Branch, Bishop Coadj.
Antigua.

W. Kenneth Maritzburg.

William Hobart Hare, Bishop
of S. Dakota.

H. Barbados.

S. T. Dunedin.

W. W. Antigua.

G. W. Adelaide.

Cortlandt Whitehead, Pitts-
burgh.

O. W. Whitaker, Bishop of
Pennsylvania.

T. B. Lyman, Bishop of N.
Carolina.

B. Wistar Morris, Bishop of
Oregon.

W. E. McLaren, Bishop of
Chicago.

John T. Spalding, Bishop of
Colorado.

John Scarborough, Bishop of
New Jersey.

W. G. Rulison, Assistant Bis-
hop, Central Pennsylvania.

S. A. Crowther, Bishop of
Niger Territory.

Benj. H. Paddock, Bishop of
Massachusetts.

Alexander Burgess, Bishop of
Quincy.

C. A. Smythies, Bishop of the
Universities’ Mission to
Central Africa.

A. G. Aberdeen and Orkney.

Alex. Bishop of Argyll and
the Isles.

J. Edenburgen.

Lambeth Conference of 1888.

John A. Paddock, Bishop of
Washington Territory.

Charles Perry (Bishop).

A. W. Roffen.

Hugh W. Brechin, Primus.

Bishop Coad. of London, for
N. and C. Europe.

W. Cestr.

C. H. Bromby, Bishop.

Maurice N. Cashel.

F. Cramer Roberts, Assistant
Bishop of Manchester.

F. H. Leicester.

D. B. Knickerbacker, Bishop
of Indiana, U.S.A.

H. B. Pretoria.

E. Algoma.

James, Bishop of Moray and
Ross.

E. R. Newcastle.

Charles Niagara.

H. Tully, Coadjutor of
Fredericton.

Charles Limerick.

Arthur Toronto.

Arthur C. Bath and Wells.

Wm. D. Walker, Bishop of
North Dakota.

J. W. Quebec.

R. Cicestr.

George F. Seymour, Bishop
of Springfield, U.S.A.

Waite H. Falkland Islands.

William Garden, Bishop of
Auckland, N.Z.

G. M. Singapore & Sarawak.

Thomas A. Starkey, Bishop of
Newark.

E. R. Tufnell, Bishop.

George H. Truron.

George Southwell.

Adelbert, Bishop of Qu’Ap-
pelle.

Wm. Croswell Doane, Bishop |
of Albany.

H. C. Potter, Bishop of New
York.

R. C. Bedford.

Her Majesty's Answer to Address. 255

Bransby, Bishop of S. John, Douglas, Bishop for Zululand.
Kaff. Dan. J. Tuttle, Bishop of

Wm. Walsham Wakefield. Missouri.

R. Caledonia. Llewellyn Newfoundland.

A. W. New Westminster. W. B. Ripon.

Hugh Miller Thompson, William P. Ossory.
Bishop of Mississippi. J. T. Ontario.

Alfred Honolulu. J. St. Asaph.

William Paret, Bishop of Hy. N. Pierce, Arkansas.
Maryland. E. Nottingham.

27th July, 1888.

The following is Her Majesty's answer to the above
Address, forwarded by the Secretary of State
to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, “ for
communication to the Most Reverend and right
Reverend Prelates who signed the address :”—

“T have received with much gratification the
address of the recent meeting held at Lambeth, of
Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of England,
and of Churches in communion therewith in various
parts of my dominions, in the United States of
America, and in other foreign countries, on the sub-
ject of the continuous extension of such Churches
throughout the course of my reign.

“1 thank you heartily for your expressions of good
will towards my Throne and person.

“You may be assured that it will ever be my
anxious desire to promote all measures which may
tend to maintain and extend the spirit of true religion,
and I earnestly pray that Almighty God may bless
your labours for an increase of Christian faith and of
the virtues which it inspires in all quarters of the world.

VICTORIA, R.I.”

256 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No. XXXI.

LIST OF THE BISHOPS ATTENDING THE LAMBETH

CONFERENCE OF 1888,

[With the exception of Metropolitans and others entitled to special
precedence, the Bishops are arranged, in the following list, according to

the date of their consecration. |

ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
ARCHBISHOP OF YORK

’ ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH ...
ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN

BISHOP OF GUIANA ... ate
BISHOP OF FREDERICTON ...
BISHOP OF RUPERTSLAND ...
BISHOP OF BRECHIN...
BisHOP OF CAPETOWN
ΒΙΘΗΟΡ OF CALCUTTA
BisHOP OF SYDNEY ...

BISHOP OF LONDON ..
BIsHOP OF DURHAM...
BIisHOP OF WINCHESTER
BisHorp PERRY i “i
BisHoP OF ST. ANDREW’S ...
BisHorP OF NORWICH
BisHoPp OF COLUMBIA
BisHOP OF BANGOR ...
BisHoPp TUFNELL

BISHOP OF MINNESOTA
BisHoOP OF ANTIGUA
BISHOP OF ONTARIO

BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL ..

BISHOP OF QUEBEC... τὸς vee
BISHOP IN THE NIGER TERRITORY
BIsHoP BROMBY res Ay

25th April, 1877.

15th December, 1861.
Ist May, 1849.

10th December, 1876.

24th August, 1842.
4th May, 1845.

24th June, 1865.

28th October, 1871.
17th May, 1874.

30th November, 1876.
Ist January, 1884.

21st December, 1869.
25th April, 1879.
29th March, 1864.
29th June, 1847.
25th January, 1853.
τ June, 1857.

a 24th February, 1859.

14th June, 1859.
14th June, 1859.
13th October, 1859.
17th May, 1860.
25th March, 1862.
25th March, 1863.
21st June, 1863.
29th June, 1864.
29th June, 1864.

List of Bishops attenaing the Conference. 257

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHoP
BISHOP
BIsHOP
BIsHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
. BIsHoP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
‘BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHOopP
BISHOP
BisHop
BIsHopP
BIsHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
_BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

OF WESTERN NEW YORK

OF TENNESSEE

oF LIMERICK

OF NELSON ...

OF MAINE -....

oF MIssouRI

OF ST. ALBANS

OF MORAY AND Ross
OF DERRY ... 3
OF HEREFORD

OF PETERBOROUGH
OF OREGON... as
OF MARITZBURG

OF ALBANY...

ΟΕ AUCKLAND

OF PENNSYLVANIA...
OF CARLISLE '
OF BATH AND WELLS

OF FALKLAND ISLANDS

OF ARKANSAS

OF DOVER...

OF CHICHESTER

ΟΕ ST. ASAPH
WILKINSON ... ὯΝ
OF GRAHAMSTOWN
OF DUNEDIN

OF HONOLULU

OF CASHEL ...

OF TRINIDAD

OF MOOSONEE

OF SOUTH DAKOTA
MITCHINSON 33
OF MASSACHUSETTS
OF NORTH CAROLINA
OF COLORADO

OF GIBRALTAR

ΟΕ ST. DaAvIp’s

OF MILWAUKEE

OF NEW JERSEY

OF CORK

OF CHICAGO

OF COLOMBO

OF BOMBAY...

OF IOWA

OF MANCHESTER

OF ROCHESTER

OF NOTTINGHAM ...
OF WAIAPU...

OF PRETORIA

OF NEWFOUNDLAND
OF QUINCY ...

OF SPRINGFIELD

4th January, 1865.
11th October, 1865.
29th June, 1866.

24th August, 1866.
25th January, 1867.
Ist May, 1867.

IIth June, 1867.

24th August, 1867.
13th October, 1867.
24th June, 1868.

15th November, 1868,
3rd December, 1868.
25th January, 1869.
2nd February, 1869.
29th June, 1869.

13th October, 1869.
30th November, 1869.
21st December, 1869.
21st December, 1869.
25th January, 1870.
25th March, 1870.
8th May, 1870.

8th May, 1870.

30th November, 1870.
4th June, 1871.

2nd February, 1872.
13th April, 1872.
29th June, 1872.

15th December, 1872.
oth January, 1873.
24th June, 1873.

17th September, 1873.
11th December, 1873.
31st December, 1873.
Ist February, 1874.
24th August, 1874.
25th October, 1874.
2nd February, 1875.
30th March, 1875

8th December, 1875.
28th December, 1875.
Ist May, 1876.

roth September, 1876.
22nd October, 1876.
25th June, 1877.

21st December, 1877.
Ist January, 1878.

2nd February, 1878.
1st May, 1878.

15th May, 1878.

11th June, 1878.

25ὃ

BIsHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHoP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHoP
BIsHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BisHOpP
BisHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

ASST.-BISHOP OF CENTRAL ‘PENNSYLVANIA

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

Lambeth Conference of 1888.

OF LICHFIELD
CRAMER-ROBERTS . é
OF NORTH QUEENSLAND...
OF OssorRY ... ἘΝ ‘
OF TORONTO

OF WAKEFIELD

OF TRAVANCORE AND CocHIN os

OF CALEDONIA

OF MICHIGAN te
OF NEW WESTMINSTER ...
OF NEWARK

OF LIVERPOOL .

OF JAMAICA... ‘

IN NORTH CHINA..

IN ZULULAND

OF WASHINGTON TERRITORY

OF SINGAPORE AND SARAWAK ...

COADJUTOR OF FREDERICTON
OF PITTSBURGH x
OF RANGOON

OF BARBADOS

OF COLCHESTER

ΟΕ ALGOMA...

OF NEWCASTLE
COADJUTOR OF ANTIGUA..
OF ADELAIDE

OF MISSISSIPPI

OF SIERRA LEONE...

OF LLANDAFF

OF TRURO

OF ABERDEEN

OF ST. JOHN’s, KAFFRARIA
OF ARGYLL AND THE ISLES
OF INDIANA... ox
OF NEW YorRK

IN CENTRAL AFRICA

OF HURON ...

OF NORTH DAKOTA

OF KILLALOE

OF KILMORE

OF CHESTER

OF SOUTHWELL

OF Qu’APPELLE

OF RIPON

OF MARYLAND
ΟΕ LINCOLN
OF EXETER ...
OF NIAGARA
OF BRISBANE
OF MEATH ...
OF SALISBURY

24th June, 1878.

29th September, 1878.
Ist May, 1879.

2sth July, 1879.

25th July, 1879.

17th September, 1879.
1st November, 1879.
8th January, 1880.
11th June, 1880.

28th October, 1880.
28th October, 1880.
30th November, 1880.
15th December, 1880..
26th May, 1881.

1oth July, 1881.

25th January, 1882.
ist May, 1882.

Ist May, 1882.

24th June, 1882.

29th June, 1882.

25th July, 1882.

27th July, 1882.

30th November, 1882.
24th February, 1883.
24th February, 1883.
25th April, 1883.
25th April, 1883.

Ist May, 1883.

12th August, 1883.
24th August, 1883.
14th October, 1883.
20th October, 1883
30th November, 1883.
30th November, 1883.
20th December, 1883.
24th February, 1884.
25th April, 1884.

25th April, 1884.

Ist May, 1884.

24th June, 1884.

25th July, 1884.

28th October, 1884.
8th January, 1885.
25th April, 1885.

25th April, 1885.

Ist May, 1885.

11th June, 1885.

29th September, 1885.
28th October, 1885.

List of Bishops attending the Conference. 259

BISHOP
BIsHOP
BIsHoOpP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

OF ELY

IN JAPAN

OF NASSAU ...
OF CLOGHER
ΟΕ EDINBURGH

IN JERUSALEM AND THE EAST ...
OF SASKATCHEWAN AND CALGARY

OF SODOR AND MAN
OF MARLBOROUGH...
OF SHREWSBURY

OF NOVA SCOTIA ...
OF PENRITH

OF BEDFORD

OF LEICESTER

2nd February, 1886.
2nd February, 1886.
24th February, 1886.
29th June, 1886.
21st September, 1886.
23th March, 1887.
7th August, 1887.
24th August, 1887.
24th February, 1888.
24th February, 1888.
25th April, 1388.
22nd May, 1888.
15th July, 1888.

15th July, 1888.

260 Lambeth Conference, 1888.

No. XXXII.

LIST OF THE BISHOPS ATTENDING THE LAMBETH
CONFERENCE OF 1888, ARRANGED ACCORDING TO
PROVINCES. ,

ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (Most REv. Dr. BENSON).
BisHoPp OF LONDON (RT. REv. DR. TEMPLE).

BISHOP OF WINCHESTER (RT. REV. DR. HAROLD BROWNE).
BisHoP OF NORWICH (RT. REV. AND Hon. Dr. PELHAM).
BisHOP OF BANGOR (RT. REv. Dr. CAMPBELL).

BisHoPp OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL (RT. REv. Dr. ELLICOTT).
BisHop OF ST. ALBANS (RT. Rev. Dr. CLAUGHTON).

BisHOP OF HEREFORD (RT. REv. DR. ATLAy).

BIsHOP OF PETERBOROUGH (RT. REv. DR. MAGEE).

BisHoP OF BATH AND WELLS (RT. REV. Lorp A. HERVEY).
BIsHOP OF CHICHESTER (RT. REV. Dr. DURNFORD).

BisHop oF ST. ASAPH (RT. REV. Dr. HUGHEs).

BisHoPp OF ST. DaAvips (Rt. REv. Dr. BASIL JONEs).

BisHoOP OF ROCHESTER, (RT. REv. Dr. THOROLD).

BisHop OF LICHFIELD (RT. Rev. DR. MACLAGAN).

BisHoP OF LLANDAFF (RT. REv. Dr. LEwIs).

BisHop OF TRuURO (RT. Rev. DR. WILKINSON).

BIsHOP OF SOUTHWELL (RT. REV. DR. RIDDING).

BisHOP OF LINCOLN (RT. REv. DR. KING).

BisHoP OF EXETER (RT. REv. Dr. E. H. BICKERSTETH).
BISHOP OF SALISBURY (RT. REv. DR. J. WORDSWORTH).
BisHoP OF ELy (Rt. REv. Lorp A. Compton).

BisHorP SUFFRAGAN OF DOVER (RT. REv. Dr. PARRY).

BisHoOP SUFFRAGAN OF NOTTINGHAM (RT. REv. Dr. TROLLOPE).
BIsHOP SUFFRAGAN OF COLCHESTER (RT. Rev. DR. BLOMFIELD).
BISHOP SUFFRAGAN OF MARLBOROUGH (RT. REv. Dr. EARLE).
BISHOP SUFFRAGAN OF SHREWSBURY (RT. REv. Sir L. STAMER)
BisHoOPp SUFFRAGAN OF BEDFORD (RT. REv. DR. BILLING).
BisHOP SUFFRAGAN OF LEICESTER (RT. REv. Dr. THICKNESSE)
BisHoOP PERRY.

BisHoP TUFNELL.

BisHoP BROMBY.

BisHop WILKINSON.

BisHOP MITCHINSON.

ARCHBISHOP OF YORK (Most Rev. Dr. THOMSON),
BISHOP OF DURHAM (RT. REv. Dr. LIGHTFOOT).

List of Bishops attending the Conference. 261

BISHOP OF CARLISLE (RT. REV. Dr. GoopwiN).

BIsHOP OF MANCHESTER (RT. REv. DR. MOORHOUSE).
BisHoP OF WAKEFIELD (RT. REV. Dr. WALSHAM How).
BISHOP OF LIVERPOOL (RT. REV. DR. RYLE).

BisHop OF NEWCASTLE (RT. REv. Dr. WILBERFORCE).
BIsHOP OF CHESTER (RT. REY. DR. STUBBs).

BisHor OF RIpoNn (RT. Rev. Dr. Boyp CARPENTER).
BisHor OF SODOR AND MAN (RT. Rev. DR. BARDSLEY).
BisHop SUFFRAGAN OF PENRITH (RT. REV. DR. PULLEINE).
BISHOP CRAMER-ROBERTS.

ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH (MosT REv. DR. KNOX).
BisHop OF MEATH (Most Rev. Dr. REICHEL).

BisHop OF DERRY (RT. REV. DR. ALEXANDER).
BISHOP OF KILMORE (RT. REV. DR. SHONE).
BISHOP OF CLOGHER (RT. Rev. DR. STACK).

ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN (Most REv. LORD PLUNKET).
BISHOP OF LIMERICK (RT. Rev. Dr. GRAVES).
BISHOP OF CASHEL (RT. Rev. Dr. Day).

BISHOP OF CorRK (RT. Rev. DR. GREGG).

BIsHOP OF Ossory (RT. Rev. DR. WALSH).

BISHOP OF KILLALOE (RT. Rev. Dr. CHESTER).

BISHOP OF BRECHIN (RT. Rev. DR. JERMYN), Primus.

BIsHOP OF ST. ANDREW’s (RT. REv. Dr. C. WORDSWORTH),
BisHop op MorRAY AND Ross (RT. REv. Dr. KELLY).

BISHOP OF ABERDEEN (RT. REV. AND Hon. Dr. DOuGLAs).
BIsHOP-OF ARGYLL AND THE [5185 (RT. REV. Dr. HALDANE).
BIsHOP OF EDINBURGH (RT. Rev. Dr. DOWDEN).

BisHop OF MINNESOTA (RT. REV. DR. WHIPPLE).
BISHOP OF WESTERN NEW YorkK (RT. Rev. DR. COXE).
BISHOP OF TENNESSEE (RT. REV. DR. QUINTARD).
BIsHOP OF MAINE (Rr. REv. Dr. NEELY).

BISHOP OF MISSOURIE (RT. REV. Dr. TUTTLE).

BisHOP OF OREGON (RT. Rev. Dr. Morris).

BisHOP OF ALBANY (RT. Rev. Dr. DOANE).

BISHOP OF PENNSYLVANIA (RT. Rev. Dr. WHITAKER).
BISHOP OF ARKANSAS (RT. REv. Dr. PIERCE).

BIsHOP OF SouTH DAKOTA (RT. REv. Dr. Hare).
BIsHOP OF MASSACHUSETTS (RT. REV. Dr. PADDOCK).
BisHop OF NORTH CAROLINA (RT. Rev. Dr. LYMAN).
BIsHOP OF COLORADO (RT. REV. Dr. SPALDING).
BISHOP OF MILWAUKEE (RT. Rev. Dr. WELLES).
ΒΙΒΗΟΡ OF NEw JeRsEY (RT. Rev. Dr. SCARBOROUGH).
BIisHoP OF CHICAGO (RT Rev. Dr. MCLAREN).

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

Lambeth Conference of 1888.

OF Iowa (RT. Rev. Dr. STEVENS-PARRY).
OF Quincy (RT. Rev. DR. BURGESS).

OF SPRINGFIELD (RT. Rev. Dr. SEYMOUR).
OF MICHIGAN (RT. REv. Dr. HARRIs).

OF NEWARK (RT. Rev. DR. STARKEY).

OF WASHINGTON TERRITORY (RT. Rev. Dr. PADDOCK).
oF PITTSBURGH (Rt. REV. Dr. WHITEHEAD).
OF MIssIssIPPI (RT. REV. Dr. THOMPSON).
oF INDIANA (RT. REV. DR KNICKERBACKER).
OF NEW YorkK (RT. εν, DR. POTTER).

oF NorTH DaAkoTA (RT. REv. Dr. WALKER).

Asst.-BISHOP OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA(RT. REv. DR. RULISON).

BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BIsHopP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP
BISHOP

OF MARYLAND (RT. Rev. Dr. PARET).

OF FREDERICTON (RT. REv. Dr. MEDLEY), AZetropolitan.
OF ONTARIO (RT. REv. Dr. LEwIs).

OF QUEBEC (RT. Rev. Dr. WILLIAMS).

OF TORONTO (RT. REV, DR. SWEATMAN),

oF ALGOMA (RT. Rev. Dr. SULLIVAN).

ΟΕ HurRON (RT. REv. Dr. BALDWIN).

OF NIAGARA (RT. ReEv. Dr. HAMILTON).

OF Nova Scoria (Rr. Rev. Dr. COURTNEY).
COADJUTOR OF FREDERICTON (RT. REv. Dr. KINGDON).

OF CALCUTTA (RT. Rev. Dr. JOHNSON), Metropolitan).
OF COLOMBO (RT. REV. DR. COPLESTON).

OF BoMBAY (RT. REv. DR. MYLNE).

OF TRAVANCORE & COCHIN (RT. REV. DR. SPEECHLEY),
OF RANGOON (RT. REv. DR. STRACHAN).

OF GUIANA (RT. Rev. Dr. AusTIN), Metropolitan.
OF ANTIGUA (RT. REv. DR. JACKSON).

ΟΡ TRINIDAD (RT. REv. Dr. RAWLE).

OF JAMAICA (RT. Rev. Dr. NUTTALL).

OF BARBADOS (RT. REv. DR. BREE).

oF NassAu (RT. Rev. Dr. CHURTON).

COADJUTOR OF ANTIGUA (RT. REV. DR. BRANCH).

OF SYDNEY (RT. Rev. Dr. BARRY), Metropolitan.
OF NORTH QUEENSLAND (RT. Rev. DR. STANTON).
OF ADELAIDE (RT. Rev. Dr. KENNION),

OF BRISBANE (RT. REv. DR. WEBBER).

OF NELSON (RT. Rev. Dr. SUTER).
OF AUCKLAND (RT. REv. Dr. COWIE).
OF DUNEDIN (RT. REv. Dr. NEVILLE)
OF WaIAPU (RT. REv. Dr. STUART).

: (wii

List of Bishops attending the Conference. 263

BisHoP OF CAPETOWN (RT. REv. Dr. W. W. JONEs), Metropolitan.
BisHop OF MARITZBURG (RT. REV. Dr. MACRORIE).

BISHOP OF GRAHAMSTOWN (RT. REV. DR. WEBB).

BIsHOP OF PRETORIA (RT. REV. DR. BOUSFIELD).

BIsHop OF ZULULAND (Rt. Rev. Dr. MACKENZIE).

BisHop OF ST. JOHN’S, KAFFRARIA (RT. Rev. Dr. Key).

BIsHOP OF RUPERTSLAND (RT. REv. DR. MACHRAY), Metropolitan.
BisHop OF MOoSONEE (RT. REV. DR. HORDEN).

BIsHOP OF Qu’APPELLE (RT. REV. AND Hon. Dr. ANSON).
BISHOP OF SASKATCHEWAN ἃ CALGARY (RT, REV. DR. PINKHAM).

BisHor OF COLUMBIA (RT. Rev. Dr. HILts),.

MISSIONARY BISHOP IN THE NIGER TERRITORY (Rt. Rev. Dr.

asanoe. CROWTHER).

BISHOP OF THE FALKLAND ISLANDS (RT. Rev. DR. STIRLING).

BisHoP OF HONOLULU (RT. REV. DR WILLIs).

BISHOP OF GIBRALTAR (RT. REV. DR. SANDFORD).

ΒΙΒΗΟΡ OF NEWFOUNDLAND (RT. REv. DR. LLEWELLYN JONES).

BISHOP OF CALEDONIA (RT. REv. Dr. RIDLEY).

BisHor OF NEW WESTMINSTER (RT. REV. DR. SILLITOE).

MISSIONARY BISHOP IN NORTH CHINA (RT. REv. Dr. SCOTT).

BISHOP OF SINGAPORE AND SARAWAK (Rv. Rev. Dr. HOse).

BISHOP OF SIERRA LEONE (RT. REv. Dr. INGHAM),

MISSIONARY BISHOP IN CENTRAL AFRICA(RT. REV. DR. SMYTHIES).

MISSIONARY BISHOP IN JAPAN (RT. Rev. Dr. Εν. BICKERSTETH).

BISHOP OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND IN JERUSALEM AND THE
East (Rt. Rev. Dr. BLYTH).

Officers of {he Conference.

BIsHOP OF GLOUCESTER AND BRISTOL (RT. REv. Dr. ELLIcotrt),
Episcopal Secretary.

DEAN OF WINDSOR (VERY REv. R. T. DAviIpson), General
Secretary.

ARCHDEACON OF MAIDSTONE (VEN. B. F. SmitTu), <Asststant-
Secretary.

264 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No. XXXIII. (See page 45.)

E neyclical Letter issued by the Bishops attending the
third Lambeth Conference, July, 1888.

TO THE FAITHFUL IN CHRIST JESUS, GREETING—

We, Archbishops, Bishops Metropolitan, and
other Bishops of the Holy Catholic Church, in full
communion with the Church of England, one hun-
dred and forty-five in number, all having superinten-
dence over Dioceses or lawfully commissioned to
exercise Episcopal functions therein, assembled from
divers parts of the earth, at Lambeth Palace, in
the year of our Lord 1888, under the presidency of
the Most Reverend Edward, by Divine Providence
Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England
and Metropolitan, after receiving in the Chapel of
the said Palace the Blessed Sacrament of the Lord’s
Body and Blood, and uniting in prayer for the
guidance of the Holy Spirit, having taken into con-
sideration various questions which have been sub-
mitted to us affecting the welfare of God’s people
and the condition of the Church in divers parts of
the World, |

We have made these matters the subject of careful
and serious deliberation during the month past, both
in general Conference and in Committees specially
appointed to consider the several questions; and we
now commend to the faithful the conclusions at
which we have arrived.

We have appended to this letter two sets of docu-
ments, the one containing the formal Resolutions of
the Conference, and the other the Reports of the
several Committees. We desire you to bear in mind

Encyclical Letter of 1888. 265

that the Conference is responsible for the first alone.
The Reports of Committees can only be taken to
represent the mind of the Conference in so far as they
are reaffirmed or directly adopted in the Resolutions ;
but we have thought good to print these Reports,
believing that they will offer fruitful matter for
consideration.

In the first place we desire to speak of the moral
and practical questions which have engaged the
attention of the Conference ; and in the forefront we
would place the duty of the Church in the promotion
of temperance and purity.

Temperance. Noble and self-denying efforts have
been made for many years, within and without the
Church, for the suppression of intemperance, and it
is our earnest hope that these efforts will be increased
manifold. The evil effects of this sin on the life of the
Church and the nation can scarcely be exaggerated.
But we are constrained to utter a caution against a
false principle which threatens to creep in and vitiate
much useful work. Highly valuable as we believe
total abstinence to be as a means to an end, we
desire to discountenance the language which con-
demns the use of wine as wrong in itself, indepen-
dently of its effects on ourselves or on others, and
we have expressed our disapproval of a reported
practice (which seems to be due to some extent to
the tacit assumption of this principle) of substituting

some other liquid in the celebration of Holy
Communion.

Purity. Qn the other hand Christian society is
only now awakening to a sense of its active duty in
the matter of purity; and we therefore desire to
avail ourselves of an occasion which has brought
together representatives of the Anglican Communion
from distant parts of the world, to proclaim a crusade
against that sin which is before all others a defilement
5

266 Lambteh Conference of 1888.

of the body of Christ and a desecration of the temple
of the Holy Spirit. We recall the earnest language
of the Report: we believe that nothing short of
general action by all Christian people will avail to
arrest the evil: we call upon you to rally round the
standard of a high and pure morality ; and we appeal
to all whom our voice may reach to assist us in
raising the tone of public opinion, and in stamping
out ignoble and corrupt traditions which are not only
a dishonour to the Name of our Master Christ, but
degrading to the dignity of a being created in the
image of God.

Sanctity of Marriage. In vital connection with the pro-
motion of purity is the maintenance of the sanctity
of marriage, which is the centre of social morality.
This is seriously compromised by facilities of
Divorce which have been increased in recent years
by legislation in some countries. We have therefore
held it our duty to reaffirm emphatically the precept
of Christ relating thereto, and to offer some advice
which may guide the Clergy of our Communion
in their attitude towards any infringement of the
Master’s rule.

Polygamy. The sanctity of marriage as a Chris-
tian obligation implies the faithful union of one
man with one woman until the union is severed by
death. The polygamous alliances of heathen races are
allowed on all hands to be condemned by the law of
Christ; but they present many difficult practical
problems which have been solved in various ways in
the past. We have carefully considered this question
in the different lights thrown upon it from various
parts of the mission-field. While we have refrained
from offering advice on minor points, leaving these to
be settled by the local authorities of the Church, we
have laid down some broad lines on which alone we
consider that the missionary may. safely act. Our

Encyclical Letter of 1888. ey,

first care has been to maintain and protect the Chris-
tian conception of marriage, believing that any
immediate and rapid successes which might otherwise
_have been secured in the mission-field would be dearly
purchased by any lowering or confusion of this idea,

Observance of the Lord’s Day. The due observance of
Sunday as a day of rest, of worship, and of religious
teaching, has a direct bearing on the moral well-being
of the Christian community. We have observed of
-late a growing laxity which threatens to impair its
sacred character. We strongly deprecate this ten-
dency. We call upon the leisurely classes not
selfishly to withdraw from others the opportunities
of rest and of religion. We call upon master and
employer jealously to guard the privileges of the
servant and the workman. In “the Lord’s Day”
-we have a priceless heritage. Whoever misuses it
incurs a terrible responsibility.

Socialism. .Intimately connected with these moral
questions is the attitude of the Christian Church
towards the social problems of the day. Excessive
inequality in the distribution of this world’s goods:
vast accumulation and desperate poverty side by
side: these suggest many anxious considerations to
any thoughtful person, who is penetrated with the
mind of Christ. No more important problems can
well occupy the attention—whether of Clergy or
Laity—than such as are connected with what is popu-
larly called Socialism. To study schemes proposed
for redressing the social balance, to welcome the
good which may be found in the aims or operations
of any, and to devise methods, whether by legisla-
tion or by social combinations, or in any other way,
for a peaceful solution of the problems without
violence or injustice, is one of the noblest pursuits
which can engage the thoughts of those who strive to
follow in the footsteps of Christ. Suggestions are

5.2

268 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

offered in the Report which may assist in solving
this problem.

Care of Emigrants. One class of persons more espe-
cially had a claim upon the consideration and
sympathy of the Conference. In our emigrants we
have a social link which binds the Churches of the
British Islands to the Church of the United States,
and to the Churches in the Colonies. No more
pertinent question, therefore, could have been
suggested for our deliberations than our duty
“towards this large body of our fellow-Christians.
It is especially incumbent upon the Church to follow
them with the eye of sympathy at every point in
their passage from their old home to their new, to
exercise a watchful care over them, and to protect
them from the dangers, moral and spiritual, which
beset their path. We have endeavoured to offer
some suggestions, by following which this end may
be attained.

| Definite Teaching of the Faith. - Recognising thus the

primary importance of maintaining the moral pre-
cepts and discipline of the Gospel in all the relations
_of life and society, we proceed to the consideration
of the means, within the reach and contemplation of
the Churches, for inculcating the definite truths of
the Faith, which are the basis of such moral teaching.
τς We cannot escape the conviction that this depart-
ment of work requires great attention and much
improvement. The religious teaching of the young
is sadly deficient in depth and reality, especially in
the matter of doctrine. This deficiency is not con-
fined to any class of society, and the task of
remedying the default is one which the Laity must
be prepared to share with the Clergy. On parents it
lies as a divine charge. Godfathers and Godmothers
should be urged to fulfil the duty which they have
undertaken for the children whose sponsors they have

Encyclical Letter of 1888. 269 °

been, and to see that they are ‘not left uninstructed,
or inadequately prepared for Confirmation. The use
of public catechising and regular preparation. of can-
didates for Confirmation is capable of much develop-
ment. The work done in Sunday Schools requires,
as we believe, more constant supervision and more
sustained interest than, in a great many cases, it
receives from the Clergy. The instruction of Sunday-
School teachers, and of the pupil-teachers in
Elementary Schools, ought to be regarded as an in-
dispensable part of the pastoral work of a Parish
Priest ; and the moral and practical lessons from the
Bible ought to be enforced by-constant reference to
the sanctions, and to the illustrations of doctrine and
discipline belonging to them, to be found in the same
Holy Scripture. It would be possible, to a greater
extent than is now done, to make sermons in church
combine doctrinal and moral efficiency, and, by illus-
trating the rationale of divine service, lead on the
congregations to the perception of the definite rela-
tions between worship, faith, and work—the lessons
of the Prayer Book, the Catechism, and the Creeds.

It is not, however, with reference to the young
alone, or to the recognised members of their own
flock, that the Clergy have need to look carefully to
the security of definiteness in teaching the faith.

The study of Holy Scripture is a great part of the
mental discipline of the Christian, and the Bible it-
self is the main instrument in all teaching of religion.

Unhappily, in the present day, there is a wide-
spread system of propagandism hostile to the recep-
tion of the Bible as a treasury of Divine knowledge,
and throughout society, in all its ranks, misgivings,
doubts, hostile criticisms, and sceptical estimates of
doctrinal truths as based on Revelation, are very
common. |

The doubts which arise from the misapprehension
of the due relations between Science and Revelation
may be, and ought to be, treated with respect, and a

270%: , Lambeth Conference of 1888.

sympathetic patience ; and, where minds have been
disquieted by scientific discovery or assertion, great
_ care should be taken not to extinguish the elements
of faith, but rather to direct the thinker to the realisa- |
tion of the fact that such discoveries elucidate the
action of laws which, rightly conceived, tend to the
higher appreciation of the glorious work of the
Creator, upheld by the word of His power.

The dangers arising from the hostile or sceptical
temper and attitude are increased by the difficulty of
determining how far our teaching and the popular
acceptance of it can be harmonised with a due con-
sideration for the views on inspiration, and especially
on the character of the discipline of the Old Testa-
ment dispensation, which, although they have never
received definite sanction in the Church, have been
long and widely prevalent.

We must recommend to the Clergy cautious and
industrious treatment of these points of controversy,
and most earnestly press upon them the importance
of taking, as the central thought of their teaching,
our Lord Jesus Christ, as the sacrifice for our sins, as
the healer of our sinfulness; the source of all our
spiritual life, and the revelation to our consciences of
the law and motive of all moral virtue. Τὸ Him and
to His work all the teachings of the Old Testament
converge, and from Him all the teachings of the New
Testament flow, in spirit, in force, and in form. The
work of the Church is the application and extension
of the blessings of the Incarnation, and her teaching
the development of its doctrinal issues as contained
in the Creeds of the Church.

Mutual Relations. Our discussion on the mutual rela-
tions of dioceses and branches of our Communion
has brought out some points which we desire to com-
mend to your consideration. It appears necessary to
draw attention to the principles laid down in the
Conference of 1878, and to urge that within our

Encyclical Letter of 1888. 271

Communion the duly-certified action of each Church
or Province should be respected by the other
Churches and their members; that no Bishop or
Clergyman should exercise his functions within any
regularly-constituted diocese without the consent of
the Bishop of that diocese; and that no Bishop
should authorise the action of any Clergyman coming
from another diocese without proper letters testi-
monial. The neglect of these rules has led to some
grievous scandals. The Bishops, on their part, are
prepared to do their best to guard against such
mischiefs, by adding private advice to the formal
document in use, but the Clergy must resolve to
exercise greater caution in signing testimonials; and
those who require them must check all tendency to
over-sensitiveness, when they find themselves sub-
jected to inquiries as to character and identification,
which, however unnecessary they may deem them in
their own case, are certainly indispensable for securing
such measure of safety as we require.

This caution applies with especial. force to the
Clergy ordained for Colonial work. We most heartily
recognise the principle that those who have given
the best years of their life to work abroad are entitled
to great consideration when the time comes at which
they want such rest or change of employment as may
be found at home. But to lay down any general
rules on this point is impossible.

One matter has been laid before us in a more
formal way—the possibility of constituting a Council
or Councils of reference to advise upon, or even to
decide, questions laid before them by the authorities
of the Provinces of the Colonial Church. As to this,
we would counsel patient consideration and consulta-
tion, of such character as may eventually supersede
_ the necessity for creating an authority which might,
whether as a Council of advice, or in a function more
closely resembling that of a Court, place .us in
circumstances prejudicial alike to order and to liberty
of action.

272 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Home Reunion. After anxious discussion we have
resolved to content ourselves with laying down
certain articles as a basis on which approach may be,
by God’s blessing, made towards Home Reunion.
These articles, four in number, will be found in the
appended Resolutions.

The attitude of the Anglican Communion towards
the religious bodies now separated from it by unhappy
divisions would appear to be this :—We hold ourselves
in readiness to enter into brotherly conference with
any of those who may desire intercommunion with
us in a more or less perfect form. We lay down
conditions on which such intercommunion is, in our
opinion, and according to our conviction, possible.
For, however we may long to embrace those now
alienated from us, so that the ideal of the one flock
under the one Shepherd may be realised, we must
not be unfaithful stewards of the great deposit
entrusted to us. We cannot desert our position
either to faith or discipline. That concord would, in
our judgment, be neither true nor desirable which
should be produced by such surrender.

But we gladly and thankfully recognise the real
religious work which is carried on by Christian bodies
not of our Communion. We cannot close our eyes
to the visible blessing which has been vouchsafed to
their labours for Christ’s sake. Let us not be mis-
understood on this point. We are not insensible to
the strong ties, the rooted convictions, which attach
them to their present position. These we respect, as
we wish that on our side our own principles and
feelings may be respected. Competent observers,
indeed, assert that not in England only, but in all
parts of the Christian world, there is a real yearning
for unity—that men’s hearts are moved more than
heretofore towards Christian fellowship. The Con-
ference has shown in its discussions as well as its
resolutions that it is deeply penetrated with this
feeling.. May the Spirit of love move on the troubled
waters of religious differences.

Encylical Letter of 1888. 273

Relation to the Scandinavian Church. Among the nations
with whom English-speaking peoples are brought
directly in contact are the Scandinavian races, who
form an important element of the population in many
of our dioceses. The attitude, therefore, which the
Anglican Communion should take towards the
Scandinavian Churches could not be a matter of
indifference to this Conference. We have recom-
mended that fuller knowledge should be sought and
friendly intercourse interchanged until such time as
matters may be ripe for a closer alliance without any
sacrifice of principles which we hold to be essential.

To Old Catholics and Others. Nor, again, is it possible
for members of the Anglican Communion to withhold
their sympathies from those Continental movements
towards reformation which, under the greatest
difficulties, have proceeded mainly on the same lines
as our own, retaining Episcopacy as an Apostolic
ordinance. Though we believe that the time has not
come for any direct alliance with any of these, and,
though we deprecate any precipitance of action
which would transgress primitive and_ established
principles of jurisdiction, we believe that advances
may be made without sacrifice of these, and we
entertain the hope that the time may come when a
more formal alliance with some at least of these
bodies will be possible.

To the Eastern Churches. The Conference has ex-
pressed its earnest desire to confirm and to improve
the friendly relations which now exist between the
Churches of the East and the Anglican Communion.
These Churches have well earned the sympathy of
Christendom, for through long ages of persecution
they have kept alive in many a dark place the light
of the Gospel. If that light is here and there feeble
or dim, there is all the more reason that we, as we
have opportunity, should tend and cherish it ; and

274 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

we need not fear that our offices of brotherly charity,
if offered in a right spirit, will not be accepted. We
reflect with thankfulness that there exist no bars,
such as are presented to communion with the Latins
by the formulated sanction of the Infallibility of the
Church residing in the person of the Supreme Pontiff,
by the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and
other dogmas imposed by the decrees of Papal
Councils. The Church of Rome has always treated
her Eastern sister wrongfully She intrudes her
Bishops into the ancient Dioceses, and keeps up a
system of active. proselytism. The Eastern Church
is reasonably outraged by these proceedings, wholly
contrary as they are to Catholic principles ; and it
behoves us of the Anglican Communion to take care
that we do not offend in like manner.

Individuals craving fuller light and stronger spiri-
tual life may, by remaining in the Church of their
baptism, become centres of enlightenment to their
own people.

But though all schemes of proselytising are to be
avoided, it is only right that our real claims and
position as a historical Church should be set before
a people who are very distrustful of novelty, especially
in religion, and who appreciate the history of Catholic
antiquity. Help should be given towards the educa-
tion of the Clergy, and, in more destitute communi-
ties, extended to schools for general instruction.

Authoritative Standards. The authoritative standards ot
doctrine and worship claim your careful attention
in connexion with these subjects. It is of the
utmost importance that our faith and practice should
be represented, both to the ancient Churches and to
the native and growing Churches in the mission-field,
in a manner which shall neither give cause for offence
nor restrict due liberty, nor present any stumbling-
blocks in the way of complete communion.

In conformity with the practice of the former

Encyclical Letter of 1888. 27 5

Conferences we declare that we are united under our
Divine Head in. the fellowship of the one Catholic
and Apostolic Church, holding the one faith revealed
in Holy Writ, defined in the Creeds, maintained by
the primitive Church, and affirmed by the undisputed
CEcumenical Councils: as standards of doctrine and
worship alike we recognise the Prayer Book with its
Catechism, the Ordinal, and the Thirty-nine Articles,
—the special heritage of the Church of England, and,
to a greater or less extent, received by all the
Churches of our Communion.

We desire that these standards should be set before
the foreign Churches in their purity and simplicity.
A. certain liberty of treatment must be extended to
the cases of native and growing Churches, on which
it would be unreasonable to impose, as conditions of
communion, the whole of the Thirty-nine Articles,
᾿ coloured as they are in language and form by the
peculiar circumstances under which they were
originally drawn up. On the other hand, it would be
impossible for us to share with them in the matter of
Holy Orders, as in complete intercommunion, without
satisfactory evidence that they hold substantially the
same form of doctrine as ourselves. It ought not to
be difficult, much less impossible, to formulate
articles, in accordance with our own standards of
doctrine and worship, the acceptance of which should
be required of all ordained in such Churches.

We close this letter rendering our humble and
hearty thanks to Almighty God for His great good-
ness towards us. We have been permitted to meet
together in larger numbers than heretofore. Con-
tributions of knowledge and experience have been
poured into the common stock from all parts of the
earth. We have realised, more fully than it was
possible to realise before, the extent, the power, and
the influence of the great Anglican Communion.
We have felt its capacities, its opportunities, its

276 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

privileges. In our common deliberations we have
tested its essential oneness amidst all varieties of
condition and development. Wherever there was
diversity of opinion among us there was also har-
mony of spirit and unity of aim ; and we shall return
to our several dioceses refreshed, strengthened, and
inspired by the memories which we shall carry away.

But the sense of thanksgiving is closely linked
with the obligation of duty. This fuller realisation
of our privileges as Members of the Anglican Com-
munion carries with it-a heightened sense of our
responsibilities which do not end with our own
people or with the mission-field alone, but extend to
all the Churches of God. The opportunities of an
exceptional position call us to an exceptional work.
It is our earnest prayer that all—Clergy and laity
alike—may take God’s manifest purpose to heart,
and strive in their several stations to work it out in
all its fulness.

With these parting words we commend the results
at which we have arrived in this Conference to your
careful consideration, praying that the Holy Spirit
may direct your thoughts and lead you to all truth,
and that our counsels may redound through your
action to the glory of God and the increase of Christ’s
kingdom.

Signed, on behalf of the Conference,
EDW : CANTUAR :

C. J. GLOUCESTER & BRISTOL,
Liprscopal Secretary.
RANDALL T. DAVIDSON,
Dean of Windsor,
General Secretary.
B. F. SMITH,
Archdeacon of Maidstone,

Assistant Secretary.
27th July, 1888. |

Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 277

No. XXXIV. (See page 45.)

RESOLUTIONS FORMALLY ADOPTED BY

ΕΒ:

THE CONFERENCE OF 1888.

. That this Conference, without pledging itself to all

the statements and opinions embodied in the
Report of the Committee on Intemperance,
commends the Report to the consideration of
the Church.

. That the Bishops assembled in this Conference

deciare that the use of unfermented juice of the
grape, or any liquid other than true wine di-
luted or undiluted, as the element in the
administration of the cup in Holy Communion,
is unwarranted by the example of Our Lord,
and is an unauthorised departure from the
custom of the Catholic Church.

. That this Conference earnestly commends to all

. (A)

those into whose hands it may come the Re-
port on the subject of Purity, as expressing
the mind of the Conference on this great

subject.
[? Carried unanimously. ]

That, inasmuch as Our Lord’s words expressly
forbid Divorce, except in the case of fornica-
tion or adultery, the Christian Church cannot

- recognise divorce in any other than the ex-

cepted case, or give any sanction to the mar-
riage of any person who has been divorced
contrary to this law, during the life of the
other party.

278

Lambeth Conference of 1888.

(B) That under no circumstances ought the guilty

party, in the case of a divorce for fornication
or adultery, to be regarded, during the life-
time of the innocent party, as a fit recipient of
the blessing of the Church on marriage.

has been a difference of opinion in the Church
on the question whether Our Lord meant to
forbid marriage to the innocent party in a
divorce for adultery, the Conference recom-

_ mends that the Clergy should not be instructed

5. (A)

to refuse the Sacraments or other privileges of
the Church to those who, under civil sanction,
are thus married.

That it is the opinion of this Conference that
persons living in polygamy be not admitted
to baptism, but that they be accepted as
candidates and kept under Christian instruc-
tion until such time as they shall be in a
position to accept the law of Christ.*

[* Carried by 83 votes to 21.]

(B) That the wives of polygamists may, in the

6. (A)

opinion of this Conference, be admitted in
some cases to baptism, but that it must be left
to the local authorities of the Church to decide
under what circumstances they may be bap-
tized.*

[* Carried by 54 votes to 34.]

That the principle of the religious observance
of one day in seven, embodied in the Fourth
Commandment, is of Divine obligation.

(B) That, from the time of our Lord’s Resurrec-

tion, the first day of the week was observed by

Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 279

Christians as a day of worship and rest, and,
under the name of “The Lord’s Day,’ gra-
dually succeeded, as the great weekly festival
of the Christian Church, to the sacred position
of the Sabbath.

(c) That the observance of the Lord’s Day,asa
day of rest, of worship, and of religious
teaching, has been a priceless blessing in all
Christian lands in which it has been main-
tained.

(Ὁ) That the growing laxity in its observance
threatens a great change in its sacred and
beneficent character.

(E) That especially the increasing practice, on the
part of some of the wealthy and leisurely
classes, of making Sunday a day of secular
amusement is most strongly to be deprecated.

(F) That the most careful regard should be had
to the danger of any encroachment upon the
rest which, on this day, is the right of servants
as well as their masters, and of the working
classes as well as their employers.

7. That this Conference receives the Report drawn
up by the Committee on the subject of So-
cialism, and submits it to the consideration of
the Churches of the Anglican Communion.

8. That this Conference receives the Report drawn
up by the Committee on the subject of Emi-
gration, and commends the suggestions em-
bodied in it to the consideration of the
Churches of the Anglican Communion.

9. (A) That this Conference receives the Report

280

Lambeth Conference of 1888.

drawn up by the Committee on the subject
of the Mutual Relation of Dioceses and
Branches of the Anglican Communion, and
submits it to the consideration of the Church,
as containing suggestions of much practical
importance.

(B) That the Archbishop of Canterbury be re-

quested to give his attention to the Appendix
attached to the Report, with a view to action
in the direction indicated, if, upon consider-
ation, His Grace should think such action
desirable,

10. That, inasmuch as the Book of Common Prayer

is not the possession of one Diocese or Pro-
vince, but of all, and that a revision in one
portion of the Anglican Communion must
therefore be extensively felt, this Conference
is of opinion that no particular portion of the
Church should undertake revision without
seriously considering the possible effect of
such action on other branches of the Church.

11. That, in the opinion of this Conference, the

following Articles supply a basis on which
approach may be by God’s blessing made
towards Home Reunion :—

(A) The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testa-

ments, as “containing all things necessary to
salvation,” and as being the rule and ultimate
standard of faith.

(B) The Apostles’ Creed, as the Baptismal Sym-

bol ; and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient
statement of the Christian faith.

self—Baptism and the Supper of the Lord—

Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 281

ministered with unfailing use of Christ’s words
of Institution, and of the elements ordained
by Him.

(D) The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in
the methods of its administration to the vary-
ing needs of the nations and peoples called of
God into the Unity of His Church,

12. That this Conference earnestly requests the con-
stituted authorities of the various branches of
our Communion, acting, so far as may be, in
concert with one another, to make it known
that they hold themselves in readiness to
enter into brotherly conference (such as that
which has already been proposed by the
Church in the United States of America)
with the representatives of other Christian
Communions in the English-speaking races,
in order to consider what steps can be taken,
either towards corporate Reunion, or towards
such relations as may prepare the way for
fuller organic unity hereafter.

13. That this Conference recommends as of great
importance, in tending to bring about Re-
union, the dissemination of information re-
specting the standards of doctrine and the
formularies in use in the Anglican Church ;
and recommends that information be dissem-
inated, on the other hand, respecting the
authoritative standards of doctrine, worship,
and government adopted by the other bodies
of Christians into which the English-speaking
races are divided.

14. That,in the opinion of this Conference, earnest
efforts should be made to establish more
friendly relations between the Scandinavian
and Anglican Churches ; and that approaches

282

Lambeth Conference of 1888.

on the part of the Swedish Church, with a
view to the mutual explanation of differences,
be most gladly welcomed, in order to the
ultimate establishment, if. possible, of inter-
communion on sound principles of ecclesias-
tical polity. 7

15. (A) That this Conference recognises with thank- ὦ

fulness the dignified and independent position
of the Old Catholic Church of Holland, and
looks to more frequent brotherly intercourse
to remove many of the barriers which at
present separate us.!

(B) That we regard it as a duty to promote

(C)

friendly relations with the Old Catholic Com-
munity in Germany, and with the “ Christian
Catholic Church,” in Switzerland, not only out

_of sympathy with them, but also in thankful-

ness to God Who has strengthened them to
suffer for the truth under great discourage-
ments, difficulties, and temptations ; and that

_we offer them the privileges recommended by

the Committee under the conditions specified
in its Report.!

That the sacrifices made by the Old Catholics
in Austria, deserve our sympathy, and that we
hope, when their organisation is sufficiently
tried and complete, a more formal relation
may be found possible.!

(Ὁ) That, with regard to the reformers in Italy,

France, Spain, and Portugal, struggling to
free themselves from the burden of unlawful
terms of communion, we trust that they may
be enabled to adopt such sound forms of
doctrine and discipline, and to secure such
Catholic organisation as will permit us to give
them a fuller recognition 4

Resolutions of the Conference of 1888. 283

() That, without desiring to interfere with the
tights: of Bishops of the Catholic Church to
interpose in cases of extreme necessity, we
deprecate any action that does not regard
primitive and established principles of juris-

᾿ diction and the interests of the whole Anglican
Communion! |

[} Resolutions (A) (B) (Ὁ) (D) (E) were carried nemine
contradicente. |

16. That, having regard to the fact that the question:
of the relation of the Anglican Church to the
Unitas Fratrum, or Moravians, was remitted
by the last Lambeth Conference to a Com-
mittee, which has hitherto presented no
Report on the subject, the Archbishop of

Canterbury be requested to appoint a Com-
‘mittee of Bishops who shall be empowered to
confer with learned theologians, and with the
heads of the Unztas Fratrum, and shall report
to His Grace before the end of the current
year, and that His Grace be requested to take
such action on their Report as he shall deem
right.

17. That this Conference, rejoicing in the friendly
communications which have passed between |
the Archbishops of Canterbury and other
Anglican Bishops, and the Patriarchs of Con-
stantinople and other Eastern Patriarchs and
Bishops, desires to express its hope that the
barriers to fuller communion may be, in
course of time, removed by further intercourse
and extended enlightment. The Conference
commends this subject to the devout prayers
of the faithful, and recommends that the
counsels and efforts of our fellow-Christians
should be directed to the encouragement of
internal reformation in the Eastern Churches,

284 Lambeth Conference of 1888. .

rather than to the drawing away from them of
individual members of their Communion.

18, That the Archbishop of Canterbury be requested
to take counsel with such persons as he may
see fit to consult, with a view to ascertaining
whether it is desirable to revise the English
version of the Nicene Creed or of the
Quicunque Vult.*

[* Carried by 57, votes to 20.]

19. That, as regards newly-constituted Churches,
especially in non-Christian lands, it should be
a condition of the recognition of them as in
complete intercommunion with us, and es-
pecially of their receiving from us Episcopal
Succession, that we should first receive from
them satisfactory evidence that they hold
substantially the same doctrine as our own,
and that their clergy subscribe Articles in
accordance with the express statements of
our own standards of doctrine and worship ;
but that they should not necessarily be bound
to accept in their entirety the thirty-nine
Articles of Religion.

Intemperance. 285

No. XXXV. (See page 44.)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES.

N.B.— The following Reports must be taken as having
the authority only of the Committees by whom
they were respectively prepared and presented
The Committees were not im every case
unanimous in adopting the Reports.

The Conference, as a whole, is responsible only
Jor the formal Resolutions agreed to after
discussion, and printed above, pages 277 to 284.

No. 1—INTEMPERANCE.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO
CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF THE DUTY OF THE
CHURCH WITH REGARD TO INTEMPERANCE,

IT is not necessary to say much of the sinfulness of
intemperance in itself, or of the widespread mischief
that is caused by it. If it cannot be considered the
most sinful of all sins, it is difficult to deny that it is
the most mischievous. And wherever large masses of
the population find it difficult to obtain work at all,
and large masses can only obtain it at wages too low

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—
Bishop of London (Chazrman). Bishop of Rochester.

δ Colorado. 7 Saskatchewan.
Ξ Kilmore. sg Sierra Leone.
ia Newcastle. is Sodor and Man.

a The Niger. τ Zululand.
τ Pennsylvania.

286 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

to sustain healthy life, the evils caused by intemperance
press with heavier weight than ever they did before.
The Church cannot be justified in witnessing this
enormous amount of sin and misery without
endeavouring to ascertain whether any special
means can be discovered for effectually dealing with
it,or whether it must be left to ordinary agencies
used with more than ordinary zeal and persistency.
The experience of the last fifty years is strongly in
favour of the use of the special means which have
hitherto achieved whatever success has been achieved
in stemming the strong current of this widely-
prevailing sin. It may be true that, if the whole
Church had been thoroughly alive to the extent and
nature of the mischief, much might have been done
by more earnest efforts, both of Clergy and Laity, in
the ordinary course of the Church’s work. But it is
the perseverance and insistance of the Temperance
Societies that has awakened the Church, and without
these Societies we have no evidence to show that
much or even anything would have been done to deal
with the evil. The Temperance Societies have com-
pelled the attention of the public at large, and have
by so doing profoundly modified public opinion.
There can be no doubt that drunkenness is now
regarded with much more severe condemnation than
before these Societies began their work,and the change
is largely, if not entirely, due to them. The Tem-
perance Societies have compelled the medical profes-
sion to study the subject with more care than before,
and the result of this study has greatly influenced
both their utterances and their practice. The science
of medicine is so complex and difficult, and the
practice of medicine has been so largely influenced
by tradition, that any particular question, such as that
of the influence of alcohol on the body, has to wait
its turn for examination unless some strong reason
forces it forward. But the urgency of the Temperance
Societies drew the attention of the profession, and

οὖς Lntemperance,... 1287

the result has justified that urgency. To the Tem-
perance Societies is due the change in the practice
of Insurance Offices, Fifty years ago it was their
ordinary rule to require higher premiums from [1{6-᾿
insurers who totally abstained from intoxicating
liquors. It is now proved that the total abstainers
live longer than other men. And this has been con-
firmed by the experience of the Benefit Societies
among which those that make total abstinence a con-
dition of membership are able to show a much smaller
average of sickness than the others. And to all this
is to be added the great and still-increasing effect of
the Bands of Hope which though in some cases open
te objection, are, nevertheless, every year adding
largely to the number of pledged abstainers among
adults, and bid fair before long entirely to change the
public opinion of the classes that live by manual
labour. ,

And it is natural that this should be so, for the sin,
being one of the sins of the flesh, must be dealt with
as indeed all such sins must be dealt with, mainly by
flight from temptation. The special characteristic of
all temptations of the flesh is the enormous difference
in power between temptations close at hand and
temptations at a distance. Ifaman is weak in this
respect the one hope of his safety lies in keeping the
temptation from him, and him from the temptation.
There are no doubt many who have no need of this.
But those who have fallen or are approaching a fall
can, as a rule, be upheld in no other way. Now,
this is precisely a work in which men can help each
other, and in which that help can most effectually be
given by an organisation formed for the purpose.
Men can help each other by breaking through those
customs of society which now surround men with
incessant temptations in every transaction of life, by
using their influence. to diminish the enormous
number of public-houses which now make every street
and road a peril to the weak, by diligently inves-

288 Lambeth Conference of 1888,

tigating the effects of alcoholic drinks on the body,
and disproving the assertion that alcohol is necessary
(except in rare and special cases) to health or to
vigorous action. But even more can men help the
weak by sympathy with them in their struggle, and
by doing all they can to make the struggle easier.
A weak man is told to abstain altogether ; and, easy
as this is to many, to some it is exceedingly difficult,
and the difficulty to these is greatly increased if they
are to abstain quite alone, andthus, apparently, cut
themselves off from the rest ; if their abstinence is, in
itself, to be a kind of stigma, and to brand them
with a public exposure of their weakness. Such men
need to be shielded and supported by the stronger,
or the battle which is often hard enough in any case
becomes too much for their strength.

Whatever may be said concerning what might
have been done by other methods, it is undeniable
that to organisations for the express purpose of
dealing with intemperance, and to these organisations
alone, must be attributed what has been done. And
if any other method of doing the work is to claim
precedence, it must first establish that claim by actual
experience before it will be possible to take cog-
nisance of it in determining the course that the
authorities of the Church should recommend. The
Temperance Societies are now doing the work, and
there is at present no sign of any other mode of
doing it being likely equally to succeed.

And after what has been said above it clearly
follows that the main weapon to be used in this
warfare is the practice of total abstinence from in-
toxicating liquors by those who desire to help their
fellow-men. Nothing but this has the same hold of
the weak or the tempted, give them the same en-
couragement to fight their battle in the only true way,
wins their affections maintains their perseverance..
Exhortations to total abstinence by those who do
not themselves abstain are always comparatively

Intemperance. 289

feeble, sometimes irritating. The exhorter often fails
to win even where perhaps he succeeds in convincing.
The lesson that he teaches is that of moderation,
which is an excellent lesson for the strong, but not
the lesson which is needed by the weak. He may
do something to prevent some from falling who now
stand upright ; he can do little to save those who
are on the edge, or to rescue those who have fallen
already.

The burden of the work must be borne by those
who are willing to abstain entirely, But, on the
other hand, it cannot be said that every one is bound
to take up this particular burden as part of his service
of Christ. Some are called to one form of devotion,
some to another. There can be no question that
every one who abstains, and makes it known that he
abstains, for the sake of his weaker fellow-men, is
giving them help, and in some cases more help than
he knows, yet while men are all bound to help their
fellows, they are not all bound to help them in the
same manner or in the same degree or against the
same enemies. All are bound to help the foreign
mission work of the Church, but not all are bound
to be missionaries. All are bound to help in spiritual
work at home, but all are not called to the same
spiritual work. All are bound to help the weak in
their battle with intemperance, but not all to help
them by total abstinence in their own persons.

It seems reasonable, however, to say that those
who are brought much into contact with intemperance
should arm themselves with this weapon of total
abstinence in their own persons, It would be well
that wherever this battle with intemperance is of
exceptional importance, or forms for the time the
first duty imposed on the Clergy, total abstinence
should be the weapon employed, This applies not
only to England, but still more to many places in
other parts of the world where native races have to
be rescued from previous habits of intemperance, or

290 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

to be upheld in their struggle to resist temptations of
this kind.

There is, however, much work to be done in this
cause outside the direct battle with intemperance
itself. And the Church cannot stand aloof from it. '

It seems to belong to the Church to use its utmost
influence to press on all Governments the duty of
diminishing the enormous amount of temptation which
at present hinders the work of elevating and civilising
the masses. There can be no doubt that wise legis-
lation might do a great deal in this direction. ‘The
diminution in the number of Public Houses, the
shortening of the hours of sale, Sunday Closing, are
instances of legislative measures that would probably
‘be very beneficial. And a combination between
Governments might wipe out the grievous stain
which now rests on the countries that are counted
foremost in the world—the stain of degrading and
destroying the weaker races. It has pleased God to
make the Christian nations stronger than any other
—stronger than all others combined. But this
strength brings with it a very solemn responsibility.
And this solemn responsibility the Church ought
incessantly to press on those who bear authority.
It is grievous that it should be possible to say, with
any most distant resemblance of truth, that it would
be better for native races that Christian nations
should never come into contact with them at all.

In conclusion, it is of importance to lay much
stress on the essential condition of permanent
success in this work, namely, that it should be taken
up in a religious spirit as part of Christian devotion
to the Lord. The work must be done in His Name
for the sake of His children whom He has bought
with His Blood. A brief success may be obtained
by forgetting the religious character of the task, and
thinking only of the misery which intemperance
causes and of the degradation inherent in it. But
the religious spirit alone will maintain the conflict

Intemperance. 291

steadily through the obstinate resistance that will
have to be encountered, and in spite of the many
disappointments and failures that will have to be
borne.

It is, again, the religious spirit which can alone
repress the fanaticism which sometimes makes the
total abstainer talk of his abstinence as the one thing
needful ; which sometimes makes him uncharitable
and presumptuous; which sometimes makes him
think lightly of grievous sin, provided it be not the
one sin which he condemns. pee

But taken up in a religious spirit this work has
a double blessing. It is not only blessed in the
victory over sin and evil, but blessed also, and
perhaps still more, in the door which it opens for the
whole Gospel to enter men’s souls. ‘The conscience
of the mass of the people speaks more clearly on
this point than, perhaps, on any other. The Minister
of the Gospel who begins with this finds that a very
large number are at once ready to accept his teaching,
because he carries their consciences with him from
the first. They have already learnt that intemperance
is wrong, and they are ready to believe in the value
οὗ a Ministry which visibly and systematically wages
war on it. And having learnt to trust and follow
the Minister in this, they are far more ready to trust
and follow him in allelse. To be all things to all
men, in order that he might save some, was St.
Paul’s rule. And as things now are in many parishes,
and in many parts of the world, the same rule will
be best kept by those Ministers of the Church who
make ἃ point of showing themselves thoroughly
in earnest in this great battle. |

Signed on behalf of the Committee, ¢
ἡ F. LONDIN :

Chairman.

292 Lambeth Conference of 1888,

No, 2.—PURITY.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON-
SIDER THE CHURCH’S PRACTICAL WORK IN
RELATION TO THE SUBJECT OF PURITY.

IN submitting the following Report your Committee
would observe that they have cast it in such a form
that, if accepted, it may go forth as the utterance of
the united Conference.

We speak as those who are deeply conscious of
their responsibility before God for the words which
they utter upon a subject of tremendous moment.

Knowing, as we do know, how sins of impurity are
not only a grave public scandal, but are also festering
beneath the surface, and eating into the life of multi-
tudes in all classes and in all lands, we cannot keep
silence, although we dare not utter all that we know.

We are constrained, as Bishops of the Church of
God, to lift up the standard of a high and pure
morality, and we call upon all, whether of our own
Communion or not, in the name of God our common
Father, to rally round the standard. Especially do
we press upon those on whom lies the responsibility
of the cure of souls, to face the question, and to ask

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—
Bishop of Durham (Chazrman). Bishop of North Dakota.

Ξ Brechin. τὶ Shrewsbury.
BS Calcutta. οἴ Toronto.

a Carlisle. i. Truro.

ἣν Marlborough. Ἢ Wakefield.

‘is Massachusetts,

Purity. 293

themselves what they are doing, or can do, to protect
their flocks from the deadly ravages of sensual sin.

We believe that, although the public conscience is
in some degree awakened, and the self-sacrificing
efforts of those who have laboured to this end have
not been wholly in vain, yet the awful magnitude of
the evil is but imperfectly realised.

We are not blind to the danger of dealing publicly
with the subject of impurity. We dread the effect,
especially upon the young, of any increased familiarity
with the details of sin. Notwithstanding we hold
that the time has come when the Church must speak
with no uncertain voice,

We solemnly declare that a life of purity is alone
worthy of a being created in the image of God.

We declare that for Christians the obligation to
purity rests upon the sanctity of the body, which is
the “ Temple of the Holy Ghost.”

We declare that a life of chastity for the unmarried
is not only possible, but is commanded by God.

We declare that there is no difference between man
and woman in the sinfulness of sins of unchastity.

We declare that on the man, in his God-given
strength of manhood, rests the main responsibility,

We declare that no one known to be living an
immoral life ought to be received in Christian society.

We solemnly protest against all lowering of the
sanctity of marriage.

We would remind all whom our voice may reach
that the wrath of God, alike in Holy Scripture and in
the history of the world, has been revealed against the
nations which has transgressed the law of purity ;
and we solemnly record our conviction that, wherever
marriage is dishonoured and sins of the flesh are
lightly regarded, the home-life will be destroyed, and
the nation itself will, sooner or later, decay and
perish.

We, on our part, as Bishops of the Church of God,
satisfied as to the gravity of this matter, and feeling

204 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

that nothing short of general action on the part of all
Christian people will avail to arrest the evil, determine
to confer with the Clergy and faithful Laity of our
several Dioceses as to the wisest steps to be taken
for the accomplishment of the weighty enterprise to
which God is calling us.

We believe that we may profitably deliberate upon
such questions as the following :— |

ΓΙ, How best to bring about a general reformation
of manners, and to enforce a higher moral tone in the
matter of purity.

2. How especially to cuard the sanctity of marriage
and to create a healthier public opinion upon the
subject, and, to this end, how best to make the cele-
bration of Holy Matrimony as reverent and impres-
sive as possible.

3. How most wisely to deal with this difficult and
delicate question as regards our children, our homes,
our schools, and other places of education.

4. How best to strengthen the hands of those who
are striving in the Army, the Navy, and other public
services, to create and maintain a high standard of
purity.

5. How best to provide safeguards for those who,
from inability to marry, or from other circumstances
of their lives, are exposed to special temptation.

6. How best to bind together, and to encourage by
the sense of union, all who desire to help, or to be
helped, in the battle against impurity.

_7..How best to purify art and literatire, and to
repress all that is immodest in language, manners,
and dress.

8. How best to enforce or amend the laws framed
to guard the innocent, to punish the guilty, to rescue
the fallen, to suppress the haunts of vice, and to
remove temptation from our thoroughfares.

We thank God for the readiness, and even enthu-
Siasm, with which the movement in favour of purity
has been welcomed by. ogee men of every class.

Purity.. 295

There is a generosity and chivalry among the young
which is seldom appealed to in vain; while large
numbers are deeply thankful for every aid in the
desperate battle against the sins of the flesh.

Once more, 85. witnesses for God, we would speak
to all whom our voice may reach. “Be strong in
the Lord, and in the power of His might.” Live
pure lives. Speak-pure words. . Think pure thoughts.
Shun and abhor all that is not of perfect modesty.
Guard with all jealousy the weak and the young.
Above all pray for the sanctifying grace of the Holy
Spirit of God, “that your whole spirit and soul and
body may be preserved blameless unto the coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Signed on behalf of the Committee,
J. B DUNELM,

Chairman.

206 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No, 3—DIVORCE.,

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO
CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF DIVORCE,

THE Committee appointed to consider the subject of
“ Divorce, and the question whether it may be prac-
ticable to offer any advice or suggestion which may
help the Bishops and Clergy towards agreement in
their action concerning it,’ reports as follows :—

They think it necessary to call attention to the
fact that in very many Christian nations there is
evidently a growing laxity of principle and of practice
with regard to Divorce, and that in some countries
strong attempts have been made to afford further
facilities for it, with the result of weakening and
lowering, both in law and in popular sentiment, the
idea of the sanctity of marriage.

1. They therefore consider it important to declare
that, inasmuch as our Lord’s words expressly forbid
Divorce, except in the case of fornication or adultery,
the Christian Church cannot recognise Divorce in
any other than the excepted case, or give any sanc-
tion to the marriage of any person who has been
divorced contrary to this law, during the life of the
other party.

2. They would add that under no circumstances
ought the guilty party, in a case of Divorce for forni-

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—
Bishop of Chester (Chazrman). Bishop of Huron.

Ἢ Bombay. » Maryland.
Ms Dover. », Mississippi.
; Durham. » Quincy.

ἦν Exeter. »» slngapore.

Divorce. 297

cation or adultery, to be regarded, during the lifetime
of the innocent party, as a fit recipient of the blessing
of the Church on marriage.

3. They recognise the fact that there always has.
been a difference of opinion in the Church on the
question whether our Lord meant to forbid marriage
to the innocent party in a Divorce for adultery: and
they recommend that the Clergy should not be
instructed to refuse the Sacraments or other privileges.
of the Church to those who, under civil sanction, are
thus married.

4. But whereas doubt has been entertained whether
our Lord meant to permit such marriage to the
innocent party, the Committee are unwilling to
suggest any precise instructions in this matter, and
recommend that, where the laws of the land will
permit, the determination should be left to the judg-
ment of the Bishop of the Diocese, whether the
Clergy would be justified in refraining from pro-.
nouncing the blessing of the Church on such unions.

Signed on behalf of the Committee,

W.CESTR:
Chairman.

ὃ

298 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No. 4.—POLYGAMY.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED ΤῸ
CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF POLYGAMY OF
HEATHEN CONVERTS.

YOUR Committee have approached the consideration |
of the subject submitted to them with an over-
whelming sense of their responsibilities; inasmuch
as the question intimately affects the sanctity of
marriage, and therefore lies at the root of social
morality.

After considering various representations rahe
have been laid before them from divers quarters, they
beg leave to report as follows :—

I. Your Committee desire to affirm distinctly that
Polygamy is inconsistent with the law of Christ
respecting marriage.

2. They cannot find that either the law of Christ
or the usage of the early Church would permit the
baptism of any man living in the practice of poly-
gamy, even though the polygamous alliances should
have been contracted before his conversion.

3. They are well aware that the change from
polygamy to monogamy must frequently involve

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—
Bishop of Durham (Chaiyman). Bishop of the Niger.

‘s Central Africa. Bishop Perry.

mv Chester. Bishop of Sierra Leone.
Ὦ Exeter. ἐξ South Dakota.
me Guiana. Ἢ Travancore.

a London. τ Waiapu.

Ἰᾶ Meath. m Zululand.

is Missouri.

Polygamy. 299

great difficulty and even hardship, but they are of
opinion that it is not possible to lay down a precise
rule to be observed under all circumstances in dealing
with this difficulty.

They consequently think that the question of time
and manner, which must depend largely on local
circumstances, can only be determined by local
authority.

4. Your Committee recommend that persons living
in polygamy should, on their conversion, be accepted
as candidates for Baptism, and kept under Christian
instruction until such time as they shall be in a
position to accept the law of Christ.

They consider it far better that Baptism should be
withheld from such persons, while nevertheless they
receive instruction in the truths of the Gospel, than
that a measure should be sanctioned which would
tend to lower the conception of the Christian law of
marriage, and thus inflict an irreparable wound on
the morality of the Christian Church in its most vital
part.

5. The wives of polygamists may, in the opinion of
the Committee, be admitted, in some cases, to
Baptism ; inasmuch as their position is materially
different from that of the polygamist husband. In
most countries where polygamy prevails they have
no personal freedom to contract or dissolve a matri-
monial alliance; and moreover they presumably do
not violate the Christian precept which enjoins
fidelity to one husband.

6. In carrying into effect the principles here laid
down, with due regard to the dictates of love and
justice, serious burdens will in some cases be imposed
on the Churches, but no trouble, or cost, or self-
sacrifice, ought to be spared to make any suffering
which may be caused as light and easy to bear as
possible.

7. Difficult questions of detail which may arise in
following these recommendations must be left to the .

U 2

300 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

‘decision of the local authorities of the Church,
whether Diocesan or Provincial.

8. Throughout this Report polygamy has been
taken to mean the union of one man with several
wives; but among some tribes the union of one
woman with several husbands is a recognised institu-
tion. It will be plain that no such union can be
recognised by the Church.

g. It has been represented to your Committee that
heathen marriages in many cases do not imply a
mutual pledge of life-long fidelity ; and instruction
has been asked as to the mode of dealing with such
cases on the conversion of the contracting parties, so
as to impart a Christian character to the contract.
The Committee think it best to leave the local
authorities of the Church to determine in what way
this end may be best attained; but they deprecate
any course which would tend to impair the validity
(within their own sphere) of contracts undertaken
prior to conversion, so far as these contracts are not
inconsistent with the law of Christ.

10. In laying down the principles which should
rule the admission of Christian converts for the
future, the Committee have no intention of passing
any censure on those who have decided otherwise in
the past; and they desire to leave to individual
Bishops the responsibility of dealing with difficulties
which may arise in any part of the mission-field from
the adoption of a different line of action heretofore
by those in authority.

J. B. DUNELM,
Chairman.

Sunday Observance. 301

No. 5—SUNDAY OBSERVANCE.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO
CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF THE OBSERVANCE
OF SUNDAY.

YOUR Committee have met and prayerfully considered
the subject of the sanctity and observance of the
Lord’s Day, and have agreed to the following state-
ments of their deliberate judgment on this momen-
tous question, which they submit as their report :—

1. That the principle of the religious observance
of one day in seven is of Divine and primeval
obligation, and was afterwards embodied in
the Fourth Commandment.

2. That from the time of our Lord’s Resurrection
the first day of the week was observed as a
day of sacred joy by Christians, and was
ere long adopted by the Church as the
Christian Sabbath or “the Lord’s Day.”

3. That the observance of the Lord’s Day as a
day of rest, of worship, and of religious »
teaching, has been a priceless blessing in all
Christian lands in which it has been
maintained.

4. That the growing licence in its observance
threatens a grave change in its sacred and
beneficent character.

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—

Bishop of Exeter (Chatrman). Bishop of Indiana.
τ Argyll. Ἢ Liverpool.
τὴ Brisbane i Wakefield.
Ἢ Cashel. ‘ Washington,

"302 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

5. That especially the increasing practice on the
part of some of the wealthy and leisurely
classes of making the day a day of secular
amusement is most strongly to be depre-
cated.

6. That the most careful regard should be had to
the danger of any encroachment upon the
rest which on this day is the right of
servants as well as their masters, and of the
working classes as well as their employers.

Signed on behalf of the Committee,

E. H. EXON.

Chatrman.

Soczalisme. 303

No. 6.—SOCIALISM.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO
CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF THE CHURCH’S
PRACTICAL WORK IN RELATION TO SOCIALISM.

THIS Committee was directed to report “on the
Church’s practical work in relation to Socialism.”
It will be desirable therefore, in the first place, to
ascertain, if possible, what is the meaning of
Socialism. This, however, is not easy, as the word is
used at present in very different senses. When
Proudhon was asked, What is Socialism? he replied,
“Tt is every aspiration towards the improvement of
society.” Laveleye remarks upon this answer, that
“ Proudhon’s definition is too wide,—it omits two
characteristics. In the first place, every socialistic
doctrine aims at introducing greater equality into social
conditions ; and, secondly, it tries to realise those
reforms by the action of the law or the State.” So
far, however, as this definition makes the interference
᾿ of the State a necessary element of Socialism, it is not
universally accepted. Schaffle, for instance, says :—.
“The alpha and omega of Socialism is the transform-
ation of private competing capitals into a united collec-
tive capital ;” and T. Kirkup, ina thoughtful article on
Socialism in the last edition of the Encyclopedia

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—

Bishop of Manchester Bishop of Mississippi.
(Chairman). > Pittsburgh.
ὰ Brisbane. ‘is Rochester.
a Carlisle. δ Sydney.
pe Derry. ᾿ Waketield.

Φ Michigan.

304 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Britannica, affirms that “the centralaim of Socialism
is to terminate the divorce of the workers from the
natural sources of subsistence and of culture”; and,
again, he says, “the essence of the theory consists in
this—associated production, with a collective capital,
with the view to an equitable distribution.” Speaking
broadly, then, and with reference to such definitions
as the preceding, any scheme of social reconstruction
may be called Socialism which aims at uniting labour
and the instruments of labour (land and capital),
whether by means of the State, or of the help of the
rich, or of the voluntary co-operation of the poor.

Between Socialism, as thus defined, and Chris-
tianity, there is obviously no necessary contradiction.
Christianity sets forth no theory of the distribution
of the instruments or the products of labour ; and if,
therefore, some Socialists are found to be in opposition
to the Christian religion, this must be due to the
accidents and not to the essence of their social creed.
Some Socialists are atheists, others advocate loose
doctrines as to family ties; others, like the Anarchists,
seek to realise their aims, so far as they have any, by
undisguised murder and robbery; while, according to
some, the very possession of private property is a
usurpation and a wrong to the community. With
such men the Christian Church can form no alliance.
And yet at the same time with what they profess to
be their central aim, the improvement of the material
and moral condition of the poor, she must have the
deepest sympathy. Their methods, indeed, are not
hers. Spoliation or injustice in any form is abhorrent
alike to her sentiment and belief. She has no faith
in the inherent power of humanity to redeem itself
from selfishness. She seeks to make men prosperous
and wise and good, not by the force of laws or
bayonets, but by the change of individual hearts, and
the introduction of a new brotherhood in Christ.

Not the less, however, is she bound, following the
teaching of her Master, to aid every wise endeavour

Socialism. 305

which has for its object the material and moral
welfare of the poor. Her Master taught her that all
men are brethren, not because they share the same
blood, but because they have a common Heavenly
Father. He further taught her that if any of the
members of this spiritual family were greater, richer,
or better than the rest, they were bound to use their
special means or ability in the service of the whole.
“ He that is greatest among you,” He said, “ shall be
your servant,’—and that for a special reason, because
each disciple was bound to imitate his Divine Master,
“Who came not to be. ministered unto, but to
minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

The Church’s practical duty,then, towards Socialism
must be determined by the answer to this question,
will the union of labour and the instruments of labour
tend to improve the material, mental, and moral con-
dition of mankind? Experience seems to show that
it will.

It may still, however, be a question, what is the
wisest method of bringing about this union between
labour and its instruments? Two principal schemes
have been proposed :—

(1) That labourers shall be encouraged in habits
of thrift, in order that with the property thus acquired
they may purchase land, or shares in societies for
co-operative production.

(2) That the State shall take possession of the
whole land and capital of any country, with or
without compensation to their former owners ; that
the property thus nationalised, shall be heldin trust
for the community by the State, the Commune, or
associations of working men; that then the State, the
Commune, or the association as the case may be,
shall take measures for the preservation, increase, and
employment of the common capital, requiring work
from each man according to his ability, and bestowing
property upon each man according to his needs, or
the value of his labour. Minor modifications of this

306 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

scheme, tending to bring it into closer harmony with
the existing state of society, have been proposed by
some Socialistic teachers, but still it may be taken as
a substantially correct representation of the ultimate
aim of very many.

To this second method of uniting labour and its
instruments the Committee would urge the following
objections :—(1) If full compensation were given to
the present holders of property the scheme could
hardly be realised, while if full compensation were
withheld it would become one of undisguised spolia-
tion. (2) If Government were able to acquire just
possession of the’ whole property of a community, it
is difficult to see how the affairs of any great com-
mercial undertaking could be conducted by the State
or the Commune with the energy, economy, and
sagacious foresight which are necessary to secure
success. (3) If all men had to work under State or
Communal inspection and compulsion, it would be
difficult for them to retain freedom, the sense of
parental responsibility, and those numerous traits of
individuality which give richness to the human
character.

The Committee strongly recommend the adoption
of the first-named method. They believe that it will
be well to encourage working men to become posses-
sors of small farms, and of shares in societies for
co-operative production in trade and agriculture.
They are not unaware that these societies have
frequently failed, but they believe that the opinion is.
not without its weight, that if due care be taken to
secure efficient and trustworthy managers, to pay
them an adequate salary, and to treat them with a
generous confidence, there is no reason why such
undertakings should not become successful, as indeed.
they commonly are now, when their management is
in competent hands.

Two objections have been frequently advanced
against this method of diminishing the present dis-

Socialism. 307

tress; Ist, that it is unjust to let any one but the
labourer obtain possession of any part of the products
of his labour ; and, 2ndly, that no man of property or
ability ought to seek personal profit from the employ-
ment of his special advantages, or ought even to be
allowed to become the permanent owner of either
land or capital.

The first objection is not tenable. The Committee
hold that it is just (1) to pay high wages for excep-
tional ability ; (2) to compensate for his abstinence
the man who refrains from consuming his own share
of the products of labour, and by so doing makes it
possible to maintain and increase the capital of the
community ; (3) to allow any one to convert his
savings into the form of capital or estate.

The second objection is really founded upon the
general spirit of our Lord’s teaching—viz., that great-
ness, ability, or wealth should be made the means of
service to the poor and weak without special fee or
reward. The Committee fully admit that this is the
ideal set before us by our Divine Master, and that it is
the end, towards which we should press, as quickly as
the conquest of selfishness will allow us. But they hold
that there is no surer cause of failure in practical
affairs, than the effort to act on an ideal which has
not yet been realised. If the Church is to act safely
as well as sublimely, she must take the self-regarding
motives with her on the long path by which she
advances towards the perfect life of love. She must
not assume the existence of what does not yet exist.
She must not, like the Anarchists, destroy the whole
existing framework of society for the sake of making
experiments. Nay, more, she must not ignore the
fact that self-regard is the necessary condition of self-
preservation, and that her Master’s law of moral con-
duct, that each shall love his neighbour as himself,
implies a certain amount of self-regard. Competition
is not injurious in itself, it only becomes so when it
is unrestricted, when it takes no counsel of the
dictates of brotherly love.

308 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

The Committee do not doubt that Government can
do much to protect the class, known as proletarians
from the evil effects of unchecked competition. The
English poor-law has long ago provided the bare ne-
cessaries of life for those who cannot otherwise obtain
them; the institution of State Savings Banks has pro-
vided for the poor man a safe investment and moderate
return for his savings. Acts of Parliament have re-
quired the builders and ownersof houses to have regard
for the health and comfort of their tenants, while the
factory legislation of this country has effectually pro-
tected those labourers who cannot protect themselves.
The Committee believe, further, that the State may
justly and safely extend this protective action in
several directions. It may legalise the formation of
Boards of Arbitration, to avert the disastrous effects
of strikes. It may assist in the formation and main-
tenance of technical schools. It may see that powers,
already existing, under Sanitary Acts, are more
effectually exercised. It may facilitate the acquisition
by Municipalities of town lands. The State may even
encourage a wider distribution of property by the
abolition of entail, where it exists; and it may be
questioned whether the system of taxation might not
be varied in a sense more favourable to the claims of
labourers than that which now exists.

But, after all, the best help is self-help. More even
than increase of income, and security of deposit,
thrift and self-restraint are the necessary elements
of material prosperity. And in encouraging and
strengthening such habits and feelings the Church’s
help is invaluable. By requiring some knowledge of
economic science from her candidates for orders ; by
forming and fostering institutions for the provision
of practical education and rational recreation; by
establishing penny banks and workmen’s guilds;
above all, by inducing capitalists to admit their work-
~men to profit-sharing, and by teaching artisans how
to make co-operative production successful she may

Socialism. 309

do much to diminish discontent, and to increase the
feeling of brotherly interest between class and class.
The Clergy may enter into friendly relations with
Socialists, attending, when possible, their club meet-
ings, and trying to understand their aims and
methods. At the same time it will contribute no
little to draw together the various classes of society
if the Clergy endeavour, in sermons and lectures, to
to set forth the true principles of Society, showing
how property is a trust to be administered for the
good of humanity, and how much of what is good
and true in Socialism is to be found in the precepts
of Christ. The call to aid the weak, through works
of what is ordinarily known as charity, has been, at
all times, faithfully pressed by the Church of Christ,
and has been met by a noble response, which has been
the chief strength of works of beneficence in modern
Society. But the matter is one, not merely of Charity,
but of Social and Christian Duty. It is in this light
that the Church has to proclaim it in these critical
times, with some special boldness and earnestness. At
the same time the word of warning should not be
wanting. Mutual suspicion and the imputation of
selfish and unworthy motives keep apart those who
have, in fact, a common aim. Intestine strife and
doctrines of spoliation destroy confidence, arrest
trade, and will but increase misery.

The Committee believe that, in the present condi-
tion of thought and knowledge, they cannot wisely or
profitably go further than they have done above in
the way of detailed suggestion. There is less temp-
tation to over-haste in forcing on social experiments,
inasmuch as the history of the past shows convin-
cingly that the principles of the Gospel contain germs
from which Social renovation is surely, if slowly,
developed by the continuous action of Christian
thought and feeling upon every form of evil and
suffering. If all will only labour, under the impulse
of Christian love, for the highest benefit of each, we

310 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

shall advance by the shortest possible path to that
better and happier future for which our Master
taught us to hope and pray.

Signed on behalf of the Committee,

J. MANCHESTER,

Chairman.

Care of Emigrants. 311

No. 7.—CARE OF EMIGRANTS.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON-
SIDER THE CHURCH’S PRACTICAL WORK IN
RELATION TO THE CARE OF EMIGRANTS.

IN considering the question of the practical work of
the Church in relation to the Care of Emigrants, your
Committee have limited their inquiries and the
recommendations which they desire to submit to the
judgment of the Conference, to those points which
bear on the promotion of the religious and moral
well-being of our emigrants. They are of opinion
that the wider subject of encouraging and assisting
emigration is outside the scope of their deliberations,
and, even were this not the case, that it is far too
large a question to be adequately dealt with in the
time at their disposal.

I. In the first place, your Committee feel that they
cannot too strongly emphasise the vast zmportance of
the subject entrusted to them for consideration. They
believe that the problem is one of the most urgent
and pressing of the many problems with which the
Church has to deal at the present day. And they
cannot but think that before many years have passed
away, the difficulties of dealing with the problem will

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—
Bishop of Llandaff(Chazryman). Bishop of North Dakota.

a Algoma 9 North Queensland.
a“ Liverpool. δ Pittsburgh.

τ Maritzburg. τι Quebec.

τ Newark. δὲ Rupertsland.

δ Niagara. Sodor and Man.

312 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

be immeasurably increased ; and thus it becomes of
paramount necessity that the machinery for coping
with these difficulties should be organised and set in
motion while the extent of emigration is such as to
render this possible.

When once the machinery is in good working
order, it will then be capable of almost indefinite
extension, to meet the increasing demands upon its
capacities.

(2) Foremost among the reasons which point to
the importance of due provision being made for the
spiritual care of our emigrants is this :—Those who
leave the British Isles and go forth to seek their
fortune in new lands, choose, for the most part, either
the United States of America, or Canada, or some of
the Colonies of Australia. Of these a very large
number are children of one or another Branch of the
Anglican Communion, and, as such, have a right to
expect that the Anglican Church will duly minister
to them in whatever part of the world their lot may
be cast. An enormous responsibility lies upon the
Church in this matter, and it is her duty, so far as in
her lies, to prevent estrangement, or any loss of
spiritual life in her children, through the accident of
their removal from one Branch of the Anglican
Church to another.

(6) The simple consideration of the very large
number of emigrants who have left and who are still
leaving british Ports, is a sufficient indication of the
immense responsibility of the Church towards them.
Since the year of the Battle of Waterloo (1815) the
total number of emigrants leaving the United
Kingdom has been 11,740,573. But a truer estimate
of the great increase in later years is shown from the
fact that, during the last ten years, since the Lambeth
‘Conference of 1878, 3,519,660 out of the above-
named 11 millions have left this country. This gives
an average of 319,566 emigrants per annum (includ-
ing British subjects and lorsigtae The average is,

Care of Emigrants. 313

however, now greatly exceeded every year, as the
following figures will show :—
Total number of Emigrants, inclu-

British and Irish Emigrants who ding British subjectsand Foreigners,
have left British Ports in the last who have left British Ports in the

IO years. last 10 years.
In 1878 ... 112,902 In 1878 ... 147,663
» 1879 ... 164,274 4 AOUO. sae ΙΖ ΤῸΝ
» δ, css) Sar, ban " EOOO ... 442,208
» 1881 ... 243,002 - OL ace: Gee he
» 1882 ... 279,366 » 1882 ... 413,288
» 1883 ... 320,118 , 1883 ... 397,157
ον 854 Ὁ, 1242876 » 1884 ... 303,901
» 1885 ... 207,644 » 1885 ... 264,385
» 1886 ... 232,900 » 1886 ... 330,801
» 1887 ... 281,487 » 1887 ... 396,494
Total ... 2,311,414 Total ... 3,195,660
Average per Annum

of British and
Irish Emigrants.
By far the largest proportion of emigrants go to
the United States. The percentage, in 1887, to the
three chief fields of emigration, was as follows :—To
the United States, 72 per cent.; to British North
America, 11 per cent. ; to the Australasian Colonies,
12 per cent.; to all other places, 5 per cent. The
following table shows the distribution of the actual
number of emigrants in 1887 :—

Average per Annum
3 ΟΣ | of all Emigrants 319,566

Emigrants (British and Irish

only) 1887

To the United
States ... 201,526

» British North
America... 32,025
» Australasia 34,183

» all other places 13,753

281,487

Total Emigrants (British and
Foreign) 1887.

To the United

States 296,901
» British North

America... 44,406
» Australasia 35,198

» all other places 19,989

396,494

ν καὶ a SS

214 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Thus, very nearly three-fourths of the 396,494 people
who left the United Kingdom last year were of British
or Irish origin, whose spiritual interests the Church
cannot properly disregard.

(c) A third reason for urging the importance of the
care of our emigrants is the danger to which they are
exposed between the time of their leaving their old
home and the time when they are finally established
in their new one.

The dangers on the voyage are by no means in-
considerable. The impossibility, when 500 or more
emigrants are carried in one vessel, of separating the
reckless and careless from those who are thoughtful
and well-disposed, exposes the latter to great tempta-
tions. This is especially the case with young
unmarried women. Then, again, the dangers are no
less great at the port of arrival, where young persons,
among strangers and surroundings which are new
and unknown, are liable to fall a prey to the
unscrupulous men and women who are ever on the
watch, at such times, to take advantage of ignorance
and innocence. And, perhaps, the greatest danger
of all arises from the temptations to intemperance
and other vices to which the emigrants are exposed
on arrival at their new settlement.

(4) One more point remains to be mentioned under
this head, and that is, the enormous value of the
opportunity afforded by the softening influence which
is brought about by the severance of the associations
of home and early life, for awakening religious im-
pressions in those who have hitherto been insensible
to the Church’s teaching, as well as for deepening
the spiritual life of those who are true Christians.
Wherever this opportunity is taken advantage of, the
result is seen in the strengthening of the Church in
the country to which the emigrant goes.

Having thus dwelt upon some of the chief reasons
why the spiritual care of emigrants is of such

Care of Emigrants. 315

supreme importance, your Committee proceed to
consider—
What work has already been done in this direction.
What work still remains to be done.

II. Work which has already been done.

Your Committee have pleasure in acknowledging
what has already been accomplished in the establish-
ment and continuance of moral and religious work
among emigrants. The Society for Promoting
Christian Knowledge has organised a plan which is
working with much success, and which, when further
developed, promises to be of the highest value to the
Church. Your Committee desire to express their
hearty sense of gratitude which is due for the
admirable work carried on by that Society, which
has always been at the head of all religious efforts on
behalf of emigrants. They would also acknowledge
with thankfulness the meritorious work which has
been done by other Societies, especially at the Port
of London, and notably that which has been under-
taken by the St. Andrew’s Waterside Mission.

Without being able to give a complete account of
every attempt made to assist and benefit emigrants, it
is gratifying to be able to point to the following
efforts, which have been successfully carried out, and
which have led to valuable results :—

(2) Chaplains have been appointed at all the ports
of departure in the United Kingdom, -whose duty it
is to minister to emigrants; to arrange services for
them, both before starting and on the voyage; to
give them introductions to Clergymen abroad ; and
generally to arrange for their reception by the
Church in the new country to which they are
travelling.

(ὁ) The Church in the United States of America
has initiated a most important work, in having
appointed Chaplains at New York, Baltimore, and
Philadelphia, whose duty it is to give such spiritual

“3316 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

aid as is possible to arriving immigrants, and to
commend them further to the Church at their ultimate
destination inland.

(c) Chaplains who accompany emigrants on the
voyage, and who minister to them, and hold frequent
services on board, have also been appointed on many
vessels going to America, Australia, and New
Zealand, and the Cape. The great value of having
such Chaplains on board is evident, and this is
especially the case on the long-voyage ships to
Australia and the Cape. The financial burden of the
remuneration of these Chaplains is borne by the
S.P.C.K.

(2) In order to provide due protection for girls and
single women emigrating, matrons (other than the
regular Government Emigrant Matrons) have from
time to time been appointed, who are required to
look after their charges during the voyage and on
arrival at their destination. The help derived from
their protection and the moral influence of the matrons
has been largely felt. In this branch of the work
your Committee desire to acknowledge the valuable
services rendered by the Girls’ Friendly Society.

. (6) Clergymen living in all parts of the world have
consented to allow persons emigrating to be specially
commended to them by letter, and they have given
valuable assistance and advice to emigrants when
first settling in a new country.

(f) The publication of some thousands of hand-
books for the use of emigrants has in the past proved
a valuable held to them. These books contain parti-
culars about the various Colonies, and other matters
likely to be of assistance. The recent establishment
~ by the English Government of an “ Emigrants’
Information Office,” where books, leaflets, and in-
formation may be had, is found to be of very great
service.

(9) A large number of books (Bibles, Prayer-books,
and other books of a religious or interesting nature)

Care of Emigrants. 317

have been provided for the emigrants on their
outward voyage. Many of these have been. given
away, and in this manner religious teaching and
influence have been brought to bear upon them.

(Δ) Forms of Letters of Commendation for the use
of emigrants have been issued in large numbers,}
and it is most desirable that Clergymen should
provide themselves with these letters. The Clergy-
man of the parish in which the intending emigrant
resides should fill up such forms, and address to a
Bishop or Clergyman of the Church abroad, where
the emigrant intends to settle. Where these letters
have been given, they have been proved to be of real
value, as forming a link between home and _ foreign
countries, and securing for the emigrant a welcome
from the Church. )

III. Work still remaining to be done.

Your Committee consider that, notwithstanding
the praiseworthy efforts made and carried out, for
the moral and spiritual welfare of emigrants, a very
large and increasing amount of work lies before the
Church, which calls for immediate, earnest and
united action on the part of every branch of the
Anglican Communion. They consider that this
work may be attempted in two ways: (i.) asa
development and improvement of existing organisa-
tions ; and (ii.) as a new departure.

(A) Under the head of the development of organisa-
tions which already exist, your Committee would
mention the following suggestions which seem to be
of importance :—

(1) That the English Bishops should impress upon
the Parochial Clergy, at Diocesan Conferences and
on other occasions, the solemn duty (a) of providing
that not one of their Parishioners be allowed to leave
home without being provided with a Letter of Com-

1 For a copy of this Form, see Schedule A.

2418 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

mendation to the Church abroad, stating particularly
whether they have been baptized and confirmed,
or are communicants; (4) of informing intending
emigrants that the Protestant Episcopal Church in
the United States of America is the only Church in
the United States which is in full communion with
the Church of England.

(2) That it is expedient that letters should be
sent from England (in addition to the above Com-
mendatory Letters), to precede the emigrant on his
journey out. These letters should be sent to the
Bishop abroad, and should give notice of the intended
arrival of the emigrant, adding such information with
regard to character and qualifications as may be of
assistance to the Bishop or Clergyman to whom the
emigrant is commended.

(3) That the Bishops in the Colonies and in the
United States of America be urged to press upon
their Clergy the duty of prompt attention to such
Commendatory Letters as may be presented to them
from emigrants, either directly or through the Bishops.

(4) That the attention of the Church in the United
States be called to the extreme desirability and need
of at once increasing the number of immigrant
Chaplains at New York and other ports, where at
present the number of emigrants makes it impossible
for the existing staff to minister adequately to those
who arrive. At New York especially it would seem
that these increased Church ministrations should be
supplied with as little delay as possible.

(5) That, with the view of increasing the number
of Chaplains who shall accompany emigrants on the
voyage, the Clergy should be specially invited, when
travelling to the Colonies, to take every opportunity
of acting as Chaplains on board emigrant ships.

1 Full information as to the duties of such Chaplains, and
of the remuneration which can in some cases be offered them,
is obtainable from the S.P.C.K.

Care of Emigrants. 319.

(6) That, in consideration of the great influence
exercised upon emigrants by the Government Matron
on board ship, it is important that care be taken in
the selection of good Christian women for the office.

(B) Your Committee feel that the work which has
already been attempted for the spiritual welfare of
our emigrants has been carried out by the best
methods, and therefore their recommendations for
the future have been mainly devoted to the develop-
ment and extension of existing organisations.

They would, however, suggest for consideration the
following four poznts of new departure, as being, in their
opinion, of paramountimportance atthe present time:—

(1) That the Church in Australasia and in Canada
- be urged to provide more adequate spiritual ministra-
tions for immigrants at the ports of arrival, by the
appointment of Chaplains whose whole time could, if
necessary, be devoted to the work.

(2) That it is most desirable to establish homes for
emigrants at the ports of departure and arrival, where
those needing protection or care may be received.

(3) That the Archbishops of Canterbury and York
and the Bishop of London be requested to prepare a
Form of Prayer for Use at Sea, having regard to the
special needs of emigrants.

(4) That it would be of great service if more fre-
quent and regular interchange of reports of work
done, and of the requirements in respect of emigrants,
could take place between the Church in England and
the Church in the United States and in the Colonies.

Your Committee cannot bring their report to a
close without expressing their deep thankfulness to
Almighty God for the measure of success which has
hitherto attended the Church in her efforts on behalf
of her emigrants, and an earnest prayer for the
guidance and blessing of the Holy Spirit in the
years to come.

Signed on behalf of the Committee,
R, LLANDAFF, Chairman,

220 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

SCHEDULE A.

[FORM OF COMMENDATORY LETTER.]

rr eee eee eee eee ee eee eee eee eee eee eee eer ss

Reverend and dear Sir,
I desire herewith to commend to your pastoral
care and brotherly »οσά OfftCOS........cccccccccccceeciceecsccsecssssssssesssssnees

Sion The Pare OP i BOs Ie oth eg ES ΜΕ in the

DEO OF cha ee ieee na who ἐς about to

ἌΣ TR oe ΣΝ ΟΕ ΟΝ

* Here state whether baptized, confirmed, or a Communicant.

[S.P.C.K.]

Mutual Relations. 321

No. 8.—-MUTUAL RELATIONS.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO
CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF THE MUTUAL
RELATIONS OF THE DIOCESES AND BRANCHES
OF THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION.

THE Committee feel that it would be impossible for
them to deal in any complete and exhaustive manner
with a subject so extensive as that which has been
referred to them for consideration. They have there-
fore determined to confine their attention to such
definite and practical points as have been brought
under their notice, and as appear to them to be
worthy of being made the subject of report.

I. The attention of the Committee has been
directed to alleged neglect of certain important
principles which were laid down by the Lambeth
Conference of 1878. ‘The principles are contained in
the following quotations :—

(1) First, that the duly-certified action of every
national or particular Church, and of each
ecclesiastical Province (or Diocese not in-
cluded in a Province), in the exercise of its

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—
Bishop of Carlisle (Chairman). Bishop of Derry.

a Adelaide. εῇ Jamaica.

fe Auckland. te Manchester.

¥ Brechin. vf Moray and Ross.
is Calcutta. Ἂ New Jersey.

Ν᾽ Capetown. Ὡς North China.

a Central Pennsylvania. a Sierra Leone.

a Chester. Ἦ Tennessee.

Colombo.

222 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

own discipline, should be respected by all
the other Churches, and by their individual
members.

(2) Secondly, that when a Diocese, or territorial
sphere of administration, has been con-
stituted by the authority of any Church or
Province of this Communion within its own
limits, no Bishop or other Clergyman of
any other Church should exercise his func-
tions within that Diocese, without the
consent of the Bishop thereof.

(3) Thirdly, that no Bishop should authorise to
officiate in his Diocese a Clergyman coming
from another Church or Province unless
such Clergyman present letters testimonial,
countersigned by the Bishop of the Diocese
from which he comes, such letters to be as
nearly as possible in the form adopted by
such Church or Province in the case of the
transfer of a Clergyman from one Diocese
to another. )

(See above, page 166-7.)

The Committee would urge that more attention
should be paid by Metropolitans and Bishops, or
persons temporarily administering the affairs of a
Diocese, to the practical enforcement of the principles
above enunciated ; and they would add in particular
the following recommendation —namely, that the
Archbishop of Canterbury be respectfully requested
to consider whether it be possible to devise and
suggest any means whereby it may be made more
easy to avoid the intrusion of unworthy or pretended
Priests or Deacons into the various Dioceses of the
Anglican Communion.

II. It has been brought under the notice of the
Committee that difficulty has arisen with regard to
the validity of orders derived from certain Bishops

Mutual Relations. 323

alleged to be schismatical. It would be exceedingly
desirable that some definite and uniform course of
action should be adopted by all Bishops of the
Anglican Communion in dealing with persons holding
such so-called orders.

The Committee are of opinion that, although much
may have been said to the contrary, there are in
reality no persons claiming Anglican Orders of
doubtful character whose claims deserve serious con-
sideration. With regard to Orders alleged to be
derived, though irregularly, through the American
Church, it may be sufficient to say that the whole
transaction is disallowed and regarded as null and
void by the American Episcopate. This fact, in the
opinion of the Committee, may be taken as a sufficient
guide to all Bishops of the Anglican Communion.

III. A question has been brought before the Com-
mittee, based upon a Report made to the General
Synod of the Dioceses in Australia and Tasmania, on
the subject of the title of Archbishop. The Committee
have been asked to express an opinion as to the
desirability of assigning the title of Archbishop to the
Primate of Australia and Tasmania. The Committee
feel that there is great difficulty in coming to a clear
judgment upon a question which must, of necessity,
to some extent depend for its answer upon local
circumstances ; but taking the question upon broad
grounds, and looking to the general interests of the
whole Church, the Committee have no hesitation in
expressing their opinion that there are cases of im-
portant Provinces in which distinct advantages would
result from adopting the ancient and honoured title
of Archbishop. In the event of this course being
adopted weighty questions might arise with regard
to authority and precedence, but upon these questions
the Committee think that it would be unwise to
enter.

IV. The Committee have given anxious considera-

324 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

tion to the question of the formation of a central
Council of Reference, to which recourse may be had
for advice on questions of doctrine and discipline by
the tribunals of appeal of the various Provinces of the
Anglican Communion.

With reference to this question, which has already
been before the Conferences of 1867 and 1878, the
Committee think that they cannot do better than call
attention to what has actually been done in the case
of Australia and Tasmania.

The following resolutions were adopted by the
General Synod of Australia and Tasmania in
1872 :—

If, in the opinion of the Committee of Appeal of
the General Synod of the Church of England
in Australia and Tasmania, the matter of
appeal concerns a question of doctrine, or
discipline involving a question of doctrine, the
Committee may, at its discretion, state a case
for the opinion thereon of a body in England,
to be called the Council of Reference. Such
Council of Reference shall consist of the
Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the
Bishop of London, together with four lay-
men learned in the law, the first four such
laymen being Lord Hatherley, Lord Chelms-
ford, Lord Cairns, and Lord Penzance. The
General Synod shall have power to fill up
vacancies as they shall from time to time
occur, but in the event of a vacancy or vacancies
existing when a case shall be before the
Council, the Archbishops and Bishop shall fill
up the same for the purpose of disposing of
that particular case. The opinion of the
Council shall be binding on the Committee,
and pending the obtaining of such an opinion,
the appeal-shall stand adjourned, with liberty
to either of the parties to set the appeal down

. Mutual Relations. 325

to be disposed of upon the opinion when
obtained. If from any cause it shall be imprac-
ticable to obtain an opinion from the Council
of Reference within a time to be limited by
the rules to be made under the resolutions, the
Committee of its own motion may, or at the
instance of either of the parties shall, deter-
mine the appeal; but in such case the con-
currence of one of the two Bishops shall be
requisite in any decision.

The Committee are of opinion that ἃ plan of
reference to a Council in England, framed upon such
principles as those adopted by the General Synod of
Australia and Tasmania, would probably meet the
wants, should they arise, of other Provinces.

It has been brought to the attention of the Com-
mittee that, in some parts of the Anglican Communion,
notably, in the Province of the West Indies, schemes
somewhat different from that above described have
been adopted. It is needless to say that the Committee
do not desire to pass an opinion upon details, but
only to indicate a general method of action.

V. The attention of the Committee has been further
directed to the danger of important divergences with
regard to matters of doctrine, as well as forms of
worship, being introduced ‘amongst the Anglican
Churches by the possible assumption on the part of
each Province or Diocese of the power of revising the
Book of Common Prayer. Such divergences might
be injurious to the Church at large, and would
certainly interfere with the mutual relations of its
different parts.

It is not within the province of the Committee to
lay down rules as to the powers of the different
branches of the Anglican Communion in this matter,
or as to the line of action which they ought to follow.
This remark applies with especial emphasis to the
Episcopal Church of America, though the Committee

326 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

cannot abstain from remarking with pleasure that
recent changes made in the Book of Common Prayer
by that Church have been rather in the direction of
nearer approach to the English Book than of further
departure from it. But with regard to the branches
of the Church within the limits of her Majesty’s
dominions, the Committee cannot express too strongly
the opinion which they entertain with regard to the
danger of alteration in existing services. They do
not deny in general that the Book of Common
Prayer may be susceptible of improvement; this
susceptibility may probably be predicated of all
things human; though it must be remembered that
it might be hard to find many improvements, which
would be generally and heartily accepted as such.
Neither do they wish to express an opinion unfavour-
able to efforts made to supplement the prayers and
services of the Church by others which her needs
demand. But the point which the Committte would
chiefly urge is this—that the Book of Common Prayer
is not the possession of one Diocese or Province, but
of all; that a revision in one portion of the Anglican
Communion must, therefore, be extensively felt, and
that it is not just that any particular portion should
undertake revision without consultation with other
portions, and especially with the Church at home.

VI. There appears to be a notion current that
Clergymen ordained for work in England, who go
out to labour for a time in the Colonies, are regarded
as more or less disqualified for subsequent preferment
at home. The Committee regret that such a notion
should be current, and they are of opinion that
Clergymen who have been willing to give a portion of
the best time of their lives to colonial work may be
regarded as having special claims for consideration
on their return home. The Committee are aware
that the subject is not free from difficulties, and that
it is impossible to lay down any general rule; but

Mutual Relations. 327

they have thought it right to give it a place in their
Report, and that some benefit may arise from the
course thus adopted.

These are all the matters which have been brought
under the notice of the Committee, or which have
been deemed of sufficient importance or of a suitable
kind to be brought.before the Conference. In con-
cluding their Report the Committee would desire to
express their sense of the extent and difficulty of the
subject which has been entrusted to them, and of the
modest character of their contribution to its treatment.
But they believe that the wise and perhaps the only
course of dealing with such a subject is not to attempt
to lay down rules which shall solve all possible
problems, but to discuss practical difficulties as they
arise, in dependence upon the Holy Spirit of God
and trusting that He who permits the difficulties will
give grace and strength to overcome them.

Signed on behalf of the Committee,
H. CARLISLE,

- Chatrman.

328 Lambeth Conference of 1838.

APPENDIX TO REPORT OF COMMITTEE.
No. 8.

ANOTHER subject has been brought under the notice
of the Committee, concerning which they have felt
great doubt as to whether it can be regarded as
coming within the terms of their reference. The
subject, however, is so important, and the Committee
have felt so desirous that it should be fairly brought
before the Conference, that they have determined to
introduce it in the form of an Appendix to their
Report.

The question was raised in the first meeting of the
Conference, whether it would not be desirable that
some declaration should be made concerning the
teaching of the English Church, and of those Churches
which are in full communion with her.

There can be little doubt as to the existence of
much ignorance and misunderstanding, not only as
to what this teaching is, but also as to the ground
upon which those Churches stand, and as to their
relation to other Churches and Christian Societies.
Such ignorance and misunderstanding can scarcely
fail to interfere seriously with the results of their
teaching.

It is true that the English Church possesses a body
of teaching in the Book of Common Prayer, in the
Catechism, and in the Thirty-nine Articles, to say
nothing of the Book of Homilies. But these reposi-
tories of teaching, precious as they are, do not appear
to the Committee to possess the qualities which
ought to belong to a declaration, such as is contem-
plated in the remarks now made. What is wanted is
a plain and brief summary of the definite doctrinal
grounds upon which the Anglican Churches stand

Mutual Relations.—Appendix. 329

(somewhat, perhaps, after the manner of the earlier of
the Thirty-nine Articles), together with a statement
of their relation to other Churches and Christian
Societies, and, perhaps, of other cognate matters
upon which, on consideration of the whole subject, it
might be considered desirable that some distinct
utterance should be made. The summary should
be such as the whole body of English-speaking
Bishops could adopt; it should, therefore, be free
from all questions of doubtful controversy ; it should
be a document which could be freely circulated as a
manifesto of the Anglican Churches concerning their
status and their teaching.

The proposal, undoubtedly, has its difficulties, as
almost every important proposal has; but we think
that the difficulties might possibly be overcome; and
certainly all danger of mischief would be avoided, if
the following plans were adopted :—

It is respectfully suggested :

(1) That a small committee of English Bishops be
appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury for the
purpose of drafting such a declaration.

(2) That the Committee have power to consult, if
they think fit, with any of their episcopal brethren,
we also with eminent divines outside the episcopal

ody.

(3) That the draft declaration, having been pro-
visionally settled by the Committee, be submitted to
the Archbishop of Canterbury, with the request that
his Grace will forward copies to each Metropolitan
for the consideration of the Bishops in his Province,
and that he will, in conjunction with the Archbishop
of York, bring the declaration before the English
Bishops.

[The term Metropolitan includes Primates of
Provinces, the Primus of Scotland, and the Presiding
Bishop of the Church of America. |

(4) That each Metropolitan be requested to return

330 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

a copy of the declaration, either approved, or with
suggestions of amendment, within twelve months.

(5) That the Archbishop of Canterbury, be re-
quested upon the return of the drafts to take such
further steps as the circumstances in his judgment
shall appear to warrant.

The Committee recommend that the declaration
should be in the form of a series of statements or
articles ; each dealing with a different subject, and
to be expressed in the simplest possible language.

The Committee feel that they would be going
beyond their province if they attempted to dictate
the subjects upon which statements should be framed:
but in order more clearly to indicate the kind of
declaration which they think the needs of the time
demand, they venture to specify the following subjects
which they believe might be profitably introduced :—

I. Of the Catholic Faith.
II. Of the Holy Scriptures.
III. Of the Sacraments.
IV. Of the Forms of Prayer and Liturgy in
use in the Anglican Churches.
V. Of the relation of the Anglican Churches
to the Church of Rome. |
VI. Of the relation of the Anglican Churches
to the Churches of the East.
VII. Ofthe relation of the Anglican Churches to
other Christian Churches and Societies.
VIII. Of the relation of the teaching of the
Church of Christ to human knowledge.

It is almost unnecessary to state that the Committee
do not regard the above list as exhaustive ; nor, on
the other hand, do they desire to insist upon each
and all of the suggested subjects as essential to the
completeness of the proposed declaration.

Signed on behalf of the Committee,
H. CARLISLE,

Chatrman.

Flome Reunion. 331

No. 9—HOME REUNION.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON-
SIDER WHAT STEPS (IF ANY) CAN BE RIGHTLY
TAKEN ON BEHALF OF THE ANGLICAN COM-
MUNION TOWARDS THE REUNION OF THE
VARIOUS BODIES INTO WHICH THE CHRIS-
TIANITY OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING RACES IS
DIVIDED.

THE Committee was appointed to consider “what
“steps (if any) can be rightly taken, on behalf of the
“ Anglican Communion, towards the Reunion of the
“various bodies into which the Christianity of the
“English-speaking races is divided.”

I. On entering upon their duty they had at once
brought to their notice evidence of a strong consensus
of authoritative opinion, from various branches of
the Anglican Communion, that the time for some
action in this matter, under prayer for God’s guidance
through many acknowledged difficulties and dangers,
has already come; and that the Conference—speak-
ing, as it must speak, with the greatest weight of
moral authority—should not separate without some
such utterance as may further and direct such action.

* Names of the Members of the Committee :—
Bishop of Sydney (Chazrman). Bishop of Minnesota.

» Adelaide. » Nelson.

» Antigua (Coadjutor). » New York.

» Brechin. » Ripon

» Edinburgh. » Rochester.

» Hereford, » Rupertsland.
» Jamaica. » ot. Andrew’s.
» Lichfield. » Wakefield.

» Manchester.

332 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

In the Convocation of Canterbury the subject has
been under discussion, at intervals, for nearly thirty
years. In the year 1861 a resolution, on the motion
of the Rev. Chancellor Massingberd, was carried
nem. con. in the Lower House, praying the Bishops
to commend the subject of “the Reunion of the
divided members of Christ’s Body ” to the prayers of
the faithful. |

In 1870, at the instance of the Lower House, a
Committee was appointed on Reunion, with power
to confer with any similar Committee which might be
appointed in the Northern Province. The Committee,
in its Report, recommended the use of the special
Prayer for Unity, appointed for the day of the
Queen’s Accession, and the consideration of the
propriety of communication on the subject with the
chief Nonconformist bodies ; and these recommend-
ations, after a singularly interesting debate were
adopted by the House.

The Report contained the following passage :—
“ The Committee do not recommend that we should set
“out with proposing alterations of our existing formu-
“aries of faith and worship, while they by no means
“deny that concessions might. be admitted hereafter,
“85 the consequence of negotiations carried on ina
“spirit of love and unity.” It also suggested that on
the day of the Queen’s Accession “all classes of
Nonconformists should be invited to institute similar
prayers” for unity, and that the subject might be
brought by Sermons before our own people.

In 1887 the subject was again taken up, and a
Resolution carried, on the motion of Canon Medd,
that “ His Grace the President be requested to direct
“the appointment of a Committee of this House to
“ consider, and from time to time to report upon, the
“relations between the Church and those who in this
“country are alienated from her Communion; and
“generally to make suggestions as to means which
“might tend, by God’s blessing, to the furtherance of

Home Reunion. 333

“the Reunion of all among our countrymen: who
“hold the essentials of the Christian faith.” In
the speech of the mover of the resolution special
reference was made to the probability of the dis-
cussion of the subject at the Lambeth Conference.

In the Convocation of York, the Committee have
reason to know that similar action has been taken ;
but, under pressure of time, they have been unable to
obtain detailed information of the actual proceedings.

From various Synods of the Colonial Church
similar, and even stronger, expressions of a desire to
make some movement on the part of the Anglican
Communion in this direction have been brought
before the Committee. The General Synod of the
Church in Australia and Tasmania, in 1886, “desired
“to place on record its solemn sense of the evils of the
“ unhappy divisions among professing Christians, and,
“through His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury,
“respectfully prayed the Conference of Bishops, to
“be assembled at Lambeth in 1888, to consider in
“what manner steps should be taken to promote
“greater visible unity among those who hold the
“same Creed.” A Resolution was passed in almost
the same words by the Diocesan Synod of Montreal ;
and similar Resolutions by the Provincial Synod of
Rupertsland, and the General Synod of New Zealand.
At the Session of the Provincial Synod of Canada
in 1886, a Joint Committee was appointed, to confer
with any similar Committees, which might be
appointed by other Religious Bodies, on the
terms upon which some honourable union might be
arrived at. :

But the most important and practical step has been
taken by our brethren of the American Church in
the General Convention of 1886, in accordance with
the prayer of a petition signed by more than a
thousand Clergy, including thirty-two Bishops. At
that Convention a Committee of the House of Bishops
presented a remarkable Report, which, after stating

334 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

emphatically that the Church did “ not seek to absorb
“other Communions, but to co-operate with them on
“the basis of a common Faith and Order, to dis-
“countenance schism, and to heal the wounds of the
“Body of Christ”; and that she was prepared to
make all reasonable concessions on “all things of
“human ordering and of human choice,” dwelt upon
the duty of the Church to preserve, “as inherent
“parts of the sacred deposit of Christian faith and
“order committed by Christ and His Apostles to the
“ Church, and as therefore essential to the restoration
“of unity,” the following :—

“αι The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New
Testament, as the Revealed Word of God.

“2. The Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement
of the Christian Faith.

“3. The two Sacraments—Baptism and the Supper
of the Lord—ministered with unfailing use of Christ’s
words of institution, and the elements ordained by
Him.

“4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in
the methods of its administration to the varying needs
of the nations and peoples called of God into the
Unity of His Church.”

The Report concluded with the following words :—

“Furthermore, deeply grieved by the sad divisions
which afflict the Christian Church in our own land,
we hereby declare our desire and readiness, so soon
as there shall be any authorised response to this
Declaration, to enter into brotherly conference with
all or any Christian bodies seeking the restoration
of organic Unity of the reat with a view to the
earnest study of the conditions, under which so price-
less a blessing might happily be brought to pass.”

This Report was adopted by the House of Bishops,
and communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay
Deputies ; and, at the instance of the latter House, it
was resolved—

“That a Commission consisting of five Bishops

Home Reunion. 335

“five Clerical, and five Lay Deputies, be appointed,
“who shall at their discretion communicate, to the
“organised Christian Bodies of our country, the
“ Declaration set forth by the Bishops on the twentieth
“day of October; and shall hold themselves ready
“to enter into brotherly conference with all or any
“Christian Bodies seeking the restoration of the
“organic unity of the Church.”

After consideration of these significant documents,
and of memorials from certain Associations which
have already done good service in this cause, it was
decided by the Committee that they were more
than justified in recommending to the Conference
that some steps should be taken by it in the direction
specified in the Resolution constituting the Com-
mittee.

II. In considering how this could best be done, it
appeared to the Committee that the subject divided
itself naturally into two parts; first, the basis on
which the United Church might, in the future, safely
rest ; secondly, the conditions under which present
negotiations for reunion, in view of existing circum-
stances, could be carried on.

The Committee with deep. regret felt that, under
present conditions, it was useless to consider the
question of Reunion with our brethren of the Roman
Church, being painfully aware that any proposal for
reunion would be entertained by the authorities of
that Church only on condition of a complete submis-
sion on our part to those claims of absolute authority,
and the acceptance of those other errors, both in
doctrine and in discipline, against which, in faithful-
ness to God’s Holy Word, and to the true principles
of His Church, we have been for three centuries
bound to protest.

But, in regard to the first portion of the subject,
the Committee were of opinion that with the chief of
the Non-conforming Communions there would not

336 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

only be less difficulty than is commonly supposed as
to the basis of a common faith in the essentials of
Christian doctrine, but that, even in respect of Church
Government, many of the causes which had originally
led to secession had been removed, and that both from
deeper study and from larger historical experience,
there was in the present day a greater disposition to
value and to accept the ancient Church order. It
did not, indeed, appear to them that the question
before them, which was of the duty, if any, of the
Anglican Communion in this matter, was to be
absolutely determined by these considerations ; but
they seemed, nevertheless, to give important en-
couragement to the Church in the endeavour to do
what might appear to be her duty in furthering this
all-important matter.

Accordingly, after careful consideration, they deter-
mined to take as the basis of their deliberations on
this part of the subject the chief articles embodied in
the Report of the Committee of the House of Bishops
in the American Church; and after discussion of
each, they submit them to the wisdom of the Confer-
ence, with some modifications, as supplying the basis
on which approach might be, under God’s blessing,
made towards Reunion :—

1. The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New
Testaments, as “containing all things necessary to
salvation,’ and as being the rule and ultimate stan-
dard of faith.

2. The Apostles’ Creed,as the Baptisimal Symbol ;
and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement of
the Christian faith.

3. The two Sacraments ordained by Christ himself
—Baptism and the Supper of the Lord—ministered
with unfailing use of Christ’s words of institution,
and of the elements ordained by him.

4. The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the
methods of its administration to the varying needs of

Home Reuntion. 337

the nations and peoples called of God into the unity
of His Church.

The Committee believe that upon some such basis
as this, with large freedom of variation on secondary
points of doctrine, worship, and discipline, and without
interference with existing conditions of property and
endowment, it might be possible, under God’s gracious
providence, for a United Church, including at least
the chief of the Christian Communions of our people,
to rest.

III. But they are aware that the main difficulty of
the subject lies in the consideration of what practical
steps can be taken towards such reunion under the
actual religious conditions of the community at home
and abroad—complicated, moreover, in England and
Scotland by legal difficulties. It appears to them,
moreover, clear, that on this subject the Conference
can only express an opinion on general principles,
and that definite action must be left to the consti-
tuted authorities, in each branch of our Communion,
acting, as far as possible, in concert.

They therefore respectfully submit to the Confer-
ence the following Resolution :—

“That the constituted authorities of the various
“branches of our Communion, acting, so far
“as may be, in concert with one another,
“be earnestly requested to make it known
“that they hold themselves in readiness to
“enter into brotherly conference (such as
“that which has already been proposed by
“the Church in the United States of
“ America) with the representatives of other
“chief Christian Communions in the
“English-speaking races, in order to con-
“sider what steps can be taken, either
“ towards corporate reunion, or towards such
“relations as may prepare the way for fuller
“organic unity hereafter.”

338 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

IV. They cannot conclude their report without
laying before the Conference the following suggestion,
unanimously adopted by the Committee :—

“That the Conference recommend as of great
“importance, in tending to bring about Re-
“union, the dissemination of information
“respecting the standards of doctrine, and
“the formularies in use in the Anglican
“Church; and that information be dis-
“seminated, on the other hand, respecting
“the authoritative standards of doctrine,
“worship, and government adopted by the
“other bodies of Christians into which the
“ English-speaking races are divided.”

They also desire—following in this respect the
example of the Convocation of Canterbury—to pray
the Conference to commend this matter of Reunion
to the special prayers of all Christian people, both
within and (so far as it may rightly do so) without
our Communion, in preparation for the Conferences
which have been suggested, and while such Confer-
ences are going on; and they trust that the present
Lambeth Conference may also see fit to issue, or to
pray His Grace the President to issue, some pastoral
letter to all Christian people, upon this all-important
subject. For never certainly did the Church of
Christ need more urgently the spirit of wisdom and
of love, which He alone can bestow, who is “the
Author and Giver of all good things.”

Signed on behalf of the Committee,
ALFRED SYDNEY,

Chatrman.

Old Catholics and Others. 339

No. 10.

SCANDINAVIANS—OLD CATHOLICS.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON-
SIDER THE RELATION OF THE ANGLICAN
COMMUNION (A) TO THE SCANDINAVIAN AND
OTHER REFORMED CHURCHES (B) TO THE OLD
CATHOLICS AND OTHER REFORMING BODIES.

YOUR Committee consider that, in view of the in-
‘creasing number of Swedes and other Scandinavians
now living in America and in the English Colonies,
as well as for the furtherance of Christian Unity,
earnest efforts should be made to establish more
friendly relations between the Scandinavian and
Anglican Churches.

In regard to the Swedish Church, your Committee
are of opinion that, as its standards of doctrine are
to a great extent in accord with our own, and its con-
tinuity as a national Church has never been broken,
any approaches on its part should be most gladly
welcomed with a view to mutual explanation of
differences, and the ultimate establishment, if possible,
of permanent intercommunion on sound principles of
Ecclesiastical polity.

Greater difficulties are presented as regards com-

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—

Bishop of Winchester Bishop of Dunedin.
(Chairman). s Gibraltar.
Archbishop of Dublin. os Iowa.
Bishop of Albany. ᾽ν Lichfield.
μ᾿ Cashel. τ Lincoln.
ἐν Central Africa. Ai North Carolina.
ἮΝ Cork. τὶ Salisbury.

ἐς Derry. ὡ Western New York.

340 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

munion with the Norwegian and Danish Churches by
the constitution of their ministry; but there are
grounds of hope, in the growing appreciation of
Church order, that in the course of time these diffi-
culties may be surmounted. It is much to be desired
that a basis of union should be formed with a people
who are distinguished by great devotional earnestness
and uprightness of character.

By the name Old Catholics we understand, in
general terms, those members of foreign Churches
who have been excommunicated on account of their
refusal, for conscience’ sake, to accept the novel
doctrines promulgated by the authority of the Church
of Rome, and who yet desire to maintain in its
integrity the Catholic Faith, and to remain in full
communion with the Catholic Church. As in the
previous Conference, held in 1878,! we declare that
“all sympathy is due from the Anglican Church to
“the Churches and individuals protesting against
“these errors”; and, “to those who are drawn to us
“in the endeavour to free themselves from the yoke
“of error and superstition we are ready to offer all
“help and such privileges as may be acceptable to
“them and are consistent with the maintenance of
“ our own principles, as enunciated in our formularies.”

Ten years have passed since this declaration was
issued, and we are now called to consider more in
detail our relations to the different groups compre-
hended under this general title.

First of all it is due to the ancient Church of Hol-
land, which in practice accepts the title of Old

* Official Letter of 1878. Supra, page 181.

Old Catholics and Others. 341

Catholic, to recognise the fact that it has uttered
energetic protests against the novel dogmas of the
Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary,
and of the universal Bishopric and infallibility of the
Bishop of Rome. It is to this Church that the com-
munity, usually termed Old Catholic, in the German
Empire, owes in the providence of God the Episcopal
succession. We recognise, with thankfulness, the
dignified and independent position which the Church
of Holland maintained for many years in almost
absolute isolation. It has now broken through this
isolation, as regards its neighbours on the Continent.
As regards ourselves, the Church of Holland is found
on inquiry to be in agreement with our Church in
many points, and we believe that with more frequent
brotherly intercourse many of the barriers which at
present separate us might be removed.

IT.

The Old Catholic community in Germany differs
from the Church of Holland, in this respect, amongst
others, that it does not retain possession of the
ancient Sees. The Bishop of that community has
wisely refrained from assuming a territorial title; we
are not, however, without hope that the Old Catholic
body may be, with the divine guidance and in God’s
good time, instrumental in restoring to that country
the blessing of a united national Church. It may be
noted that Bishop Reinkens, shortly after his con-
secration, was recognised as a Catholic Bishop by the
civil power in Prussia, Baden, and Hesse.! He and
the parochial Clergy under him have the right and
duty, recognised by the State, of teaching the chil-

1 The documents in question are printed at length in Der
Altkatholikismus, published in 1887 by J. F. von Schulte, pp.
405, 415, 416. The Prussian Old Catholic law is to be found on
pp. nah Cf. pp. 549 foll. (Staatszuschuss fiir die Altkatho-
iken),

342 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

dren of their own confession in the public schools.
They are also in undisturbed possession of a number
of ancient churches and benefices, and receive for the
present a subsidy granted by Parliament.

As regards the form of doctrine actually professed
by this body, we believe that its return to the stan-
dards of the undivided Church is a distinct advance
towards the reunion of Christendom. We learn that
it formulates the fuller expression of its belief in
catechisms and manuals of instruction, rather than in
articles or confessions, because it desires to avoid any
methods which might create or perpetuate divisions.

We cannot consider that it is in schism as regards
the Roman Church, because to do so would be to
concede the lawfulness of the imposition of new terms
of communion, and of the extravagant assertions by
the Papacy of ordinary and immediate jurisdiction
in every Diocese. For ourselves we regard it as a
duty to promote friendly relations with the Old
Catholics of Germany, not only out of sympathy with
them, but also in thankfulness to God, who has
strengthened them to suffer for the truth under great
discouragements, difficulties,and temptations. We owe
them our intercessions, our support, and our brotherly
counsel ; and we have reason to believe that aid from
individual members of our Church, may be most
beneficially given towards the training of their future
Clergy.

We see no reason why we should not admit their
Clergy and faithful Laity to Holy Communion on
the same conditions as our own Communicants, and
we also acknowledge the readiness which they have
shown to offer spiritual privileges to members of our
own Church.

We regret that differences in our marriage laws.
which we believe to be of great importance, compel
us to state that we are obliged to debar from Holy
Communion any person who may have contracted a
marriage not sanctioned by the laws and canons of

Old Catholics and Others. 343

the Anglican Church. Nor could we, in justice to the
Old Catholics, admit any one who would be debarred
from communion among themselves.

11.

The “ Christian Catholic Church” in Switzerland,
which has adopted a title long used by the Church
in that country, has a recognised civil position of
much the same character as that possessed by the Old
Catholics of Germany. We consider that it is a body
now sufficiently established to receive the assurance
of the same sympathy and the offer of the same
privileges from ourselves.

IV.

The Old Catholic community in Austria has been
recognised by the State as a distinct religious associa-
tion, in accordance with the law of May 2oth, 1874.!
Its constitution provides for the presidency of a
Bishop, but no election has as yet taken place, not
from any indifference on the part of its members, but
on account of the difficulty of securing the stipend
required by law. In the mean time it has many of
the rights secured by law to the German body. The
Austrian Old Catholics have made great sacrifices,
and deserve great sympathy from us; which we hope
may be expressed in a practical manner. They have,
we believe, an important future before them, if rightly
guided. Wecannot, however, regard the organisation
in Austria as sufficiently tried and complete to
warrant a more formal relation on our part at the
present time.

The same remark applies with even greater force
to the smaller groups of brave and earnest men of the

1'Von Schulte, Der Althatholikismus, p. 435.

244 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Latin races, driven under somewhat similar circum-
stances to associate themselves in separate congrega-
tions in Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal. We
sympathise with their efforts to free themselves from
the burden of unlawful terms of communion. We
have reason to believe that there are many who think
with them, but have not seen the way to follow the
outward steps which thev have taken. We trust that
in time they may be enabled to adopt such sound
forms of doctrine and discipline and to secure such
Catholic organisation as will permit us to give them
a fuller recognition. We desire, in our outlook into
the future, to call to mind the well-known declaration
of the Gallican Clergy of 1862,' and also the advances
made by Archbishop Wake in correspondence with
the Doctors of the Sorbonne,’ towards establishing

1 See Bossuet’s Défense de la Declaration du Clergé de
France, ὅθε. 2 vols. 4to. Amsterdam, 1745, and Dupin’s
Manuel du Droit public ecclésiastigue francais, pp. 97-100,
ed. 5. Paris: Henri Plon, 1860.

2 Archbishop Wake wrote as follows to Mr. Beauvoir, on
November 18th, 1718, in regard to this correspondence :—‘ If
‘*“ we could once divide the Gallican Church [from the Roman], a
“reformation in other matters would follow as a matter of
“course. The scheme that seems to me most likely to prevail,
‘is, to agree in the independence (as to all matters of authority)
*“of every national Church on any others ; and in their right
“to determine all matters that arise within themselves ; and,
‘“for points of doctrine, to agree, as far as possible, in all
‘‘ articles of any moment (as in effect we already do, or easily
‘‘ may); and, for other matters, to allowa difference till God shall
ἐς bring us to a union in those also. One only thing should be
‘* provided for, to purge out of the public offices of the Church
“such things as hinder a perfect communion in the service of
* the Church, that so, wherever any come from us to them or
“ from them to us, we may all join together in Prayers and the
“ Holy Sacraments with each other. Jn our Liturgy there is
“ nothing but what they allow, save the single rubric relating
“to the Eucharist ; in theirs nothing but what they agree may
““ be laid aside, and yet the public offices be never the worse or
‘‘ more imperfect for the want of it. Such a scheme as this I

Old Catholics and Others. 345

a basis for intercommunion between the Churches of
France and England. If some such principles
could now be revived, we have reason to believe that
they would be welcomed by many both in France
and Italy, and they might again form the basis of
hopeful negotiations.

In concluding this portion of our Report we feel it
our duty to express the opinion that the consecration,
by Bishops of our Communion, of a Bishop, to exer-
cise his functions in a foreign country, within the
limits of an ancient territorial jurisdiction and over
the natives of that country, is a step of the gravest
importance and fraught with enduring consequences,
the issues of which cannot be foreseen. Whilst the
right of Bishops of the Catholic Church to interpose
under conditions of extreme necessity has always
been acknowledged, we deprecate any action that
does not carefully regard primitive and established
principles of jurisdiction and the interests of the
whole Anglican Communion.

VI.

Lastly, the Committee have been asked at the last
moment to consider the subject of the orders of the
United Brethren, commonly called the Moravians.
At the last Conference a number of the Bishops
“were recommended to associate with themselves
“such learned persons as they might deem eminently
“qualified to assist them by their knowledge of the

“take to be a more proper ground of peace at the begininng
‘than to go to more particulars.”

The correspondence of Archbishop Wake with Mr. Beauvoir,
Dr. Dupin, Dr. P. Piers Girardin, and others, is printed in the
fourth Appendix to Dr. Maclaine’s translation of Mosheim’s

Church History, vol. vi., pp. 126, foll., London, 1828. The
above letter will be found in full on p. 172, and is quoted in Rev.
G. G. Perry’s History of the English Church, third period,
p. 48, London, 1887.

3246 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

“historical difficulties involved.”! These Bishops
have not been able to act upon this recommendation,
and no report is before the Conference. Your Com-
mittee, in the short time allowed them, have not
found it possible to inquire into the details of this
subject with such care as would enable them to
propose to the Conference any sufficient basis for the
expression of an authoritative opinion.

It must not, however, be overlooked that from
time to time, up to the present day, very friendly
relations have existed between Moravians and
members of our Communion. In their greatest
trials they have received from eminent English
Bishops and Churchmen the sympathy and support
due to a zealous body of Christians, imbued with a
primitive spirit, and claiming to possess a valid
Episcopate.

The labours of Moravian Missionaries are ἀμνῶν
to all the worid. We should therefore welcome any
clearer illustration of their history and actual status
on the part of their own divines.

The subjects committed to the consideration of
this Committee have embraced, as will be seen, a
very wide range of interests, and we have reluctantly
been compelled, on this account, to confine our
Report almost entirely to the bodies specified in the
terms of our commission.

Signed on behalf of the Committee,
E. HAROLD WINTON,

Chairman.

1 Supra, page 183.

Eastern Churches. 347

No. 11.—EASTERN CHURCHES.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO CON-
SIDER ΤῊΝ RELATION OF THE ANGLICAN
COMMUNION TO THE EASTERN CHURCHES.

YOUR Committee regard the friendly feelings
manifested towards our Church by the Orthodox
Eastern Communion as a matter for deep thankful-
ness. These feelings inspire the hope that at no
distant time closer relations may be established
between the two Churches. Your Committee,
however, are of opinion that any hasty or ill-con-
sidered step in this direction would only retard the
accomplishment of this hope. Our expectations of
nearer fellowship are founded upon the friendly tone
of the correspondence which the Archbishop of Can-
terbury and his predecessors have held from time te
time with Patriarchs of the Orthodox Church, and
upon the cordiality of the welcome given by the
Heads of that Church to Anglican Bishops and
Clergy, such as the Bishop of Gibraltar, who have
travelled in the East. Additional grounds of hope
are furnished by the visit of Archbishop? Lycurgus
to England in 1870, by the conversation which
passed between him and the present Bishop of
Winchester at Ely, by the words which Archbishop

1 Names of the Members of the Committee :—

Bishop of Winchester. Bishop of Limerick.
(Chairman). ‘ Meath.

Bishop Blyth. ἐν Springfield,

Bishop of Gibraltar. ‘ Travancore.

᾿ Iowa.

3 Lycurgus, late Archbishop of Syra and. Tenos.
Ὁ

348 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Lycurgus used at the conclusion of the second
Conference held at Bonn ;! and by the request which
the Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem recently
addressed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, that the
Anglican Bishopric in Jerusalem should be re-con-
stituted, and that the head-quarters of the Bishop
should be placed in that city rather than at Beyrout
or elsewhere.

We reflect with thankfulness that there exist no
bars, such as are presented to communion with the
Latins by the formulated assertion of the infallibility
of the Church residing in the person of the Supreme.
Pontiff, by the doctrine of the Immaculate Concep-
tion, and other novel dogmas imposed by the
decrees of later Councils.

We must congratulate the Christian world that,
through the research of a Greek Metropolitan,
literature has been lately enriched by the recovery
of an ancient document which throws unexpected
light upon the early development of ecclesiastical
organisation.

It would not be right, however, to disguise from
ourselves the hindrances which exist on either side.
The first and most formidable of these is the disputed.
clause inserted in the Creed of Constantinople,.

1 At the end of the Conference at Ely (1870), Archbishop
Lycurgus said :—

“When I return to Greece I will say that the Church of
“England is not like other Protestant bodies. I will say that
“1 15 ἃ sound Catholic Church very like our own; and I trust
“that by friendly discussion union between the two Churches
“may be brought about.”

At the end of the Bonn Conference (1875), he said to
Dr. Von Dollinger :—

“In the name of all those of my own communion I thank
“you, Mr. President, for your marvellous efforts in the work of
“reuniting the several Churches, of bringing together again
“the so numerous divisions of the Rock of our Redeemer.
“Our joy is full; and there will be great joy in our homes
“also. We earnestly pray God for His further blessing.”

Eastern Churches. 349

erroneously called the Nicene Creed, without any
Conciliar authority, by the Latin Church. This
clause, which has the prescription of centuries, and
is capable of being explained in an orthodox sense, it
may be very difficult to remove. Another barrier to
full understanding between the Orthodox Eastern
Church and ourselves would be the extreme im-
portance attached by that Church to trine immersion
in the rite of Baptism, which practice, however, there
is nothing to prevent our Church from formally
sanctioning. We, on the other hand, experience a
somewhat similar difficulty as regards the Eastern
rite of Confirmation, which we can hardly consider
equivalent to ours, inasmuch as it omits the im-
position of the Bishop’s hands, and is usually con-
ferred upon unconscious infants ; yet we do not
regard this as requiring members of the Orthodox
Church to receive our Confirmation. It would be
difficult for us to enter into more intimate relations
with that Church so long as it retains the use of icons,
the invocation of the Saints, and the cultus of the
Blessed Virgin ; although it is but fair to state that
the Greeks, in sanctioning the use of pictorial repre-
sentations for the purpose of promoting devotion,
expressly disclaim the sin of idolatry, which they
conceive would attach to the bowing down before
sculptured or molten images. Moreover, the decrees
of the second Council of Niczea, sanctioning the use
of icons, were framed in a spirit of reaction against
the rationalising measures, as they were regarded, of
the iconoclastic Emperors. The Greeks might be
reminded that the decrees of that Council, having
been deliberately rejected seven years afterwards by
the Council of Frankfort, and not having been
accepted by the Latin Church till after the lapse of
two centuries, and then only under Papal influence,
cannot be regarded as binding upon the Church.
Your Committee would impress upon their fellow-
Christians the propriety of abstaining from all efforts

350 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

to induce individual members of the Orthodox
Eastern Church to leave their own communion. If
some be dissatisfied with its teachings or usages, and
find a lack of spiritual life in its worship, they should
be advised not to leave the Church of their baptism,
but by remaining in it to endeavour to become centres
of life and light to their own people; more especially
as the Orthodox Eastern Church has never committed
itself to any theory that would make it impossible to
reconsider and revise its standard and practice.

- Your Committee think it desirable that the Heads
of that communion should be supplied with some
authoritative document setting forth the historical
facts relating to our orders and our position in the
Catholic Church; as much misconception appears stil!
prevail on this subject. Your Committee feel that
the position which England now occupies in Cyprus
and in Egypt places in our hands exceptional oppor-
tunities of elevating the moral and spiritual life of our
Eastern brethren. Especially may this be done by
introducing or promoting higher education: any
help given in this way we have reason to believe
would be warmly welcomed. We rejoice to know
that schools have lately been established at Constan-
tinople and elsewhere for the purpose of supplying
education to those who are in training for the ministry.
In the more general diffusion of knowledge amongst
the instructors of the people lies the best hope of that
mutual understanding and esteem for which the
Heads of the Orthodox Church have shown so much
desire. ,

Your Committee cannot be expected to deal
separately with the other Churches of the East,
among which the Armenian appears to be the largest
and most important. Approaches have been made
to us from time to time by Bishops and other repre-
sentatives of this communion, appealing for aid in
support of educational projects for the instruction of
their own people. The Armenian Church lies under

Eastern Churches. 351

the imputation of heresy. But it has always
protested against this imputation, affirming the
charge to have arisen from a misconception of its
formularies. The departure from orthodoxy may,
perhaps, have been more apparent than real; and
the erroneous element in its creed appears now to
be gradually losing its hold upon the moral and
religious consciousness of the Armenian people. |

In regard to other Eastern communities, such as
the Coptic, Abyssinian, Syrian, and Chaldean, your
Committee consider that our position in the East
involves some obligations And if these communities
have fallen into error, and show a lack of moral and
spiritual life, we must recollect that but for them the
light of Christianity in these countries would have
been utterly extinguished, and that they have suffered
for many centuries from cruel oppression and _per-
secution. If we should have opportunity, our aim
should be to improve their mental, moral, and
religious condition, and to induce them to return to
the unity of the faith without prejudice to their
liberty. This we take to be the purpose of the
Assyrian Mission set on foot by the late Archbishop
of Canterbury, and continued by his successor.

In conclusion, we would could call attention to the
fact that in the East advance is slow, and even in
the West we find differences perpetuate themselves,
owing to national peculiarities, hereditary prejudices,
and other causes, in spite of real wish for unity. We
think that Christians need to be cautioned against
impatience in expecting quick results. Such im-
patience argues imperfect trust in the ultimate ful-
filment of our Lord’s prayer for His people that they
“all may be ONE.”

Signed on behalf of the Committee,

E. HAROLD WINTON,
Chairman.

352 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No. 12—AUTHORITATIVE STANDARDS.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE! APPOINTED TO
CONSIDER THE SUBJECT OF AUTHORITATIVE
STANDARDS OF DOCTRINE AND WORSHIP.

IN considering the subject of the Authoritative
Standards of Doctrine and Worship, which are the
primary means of securing internal union amongst
ourselves, and of setting forth our Faith before the
rest of Christendom, we acknowledge first of all, with
deep thankfulness to Almighty God, the vital and
growing unity of the great Communion to which we
belong.

We acknowledge also with the same _ heartfelt
thankfulness the increasing intercourse which is
taking place between our own Churches and other
Churches of Christendom, and the extension of our
own Communion into many non-Christian countries,
to which God has especially called us to minister by
the diffusion of the English-speaking race throughout
the worid.

The consideration of the new conditions thus
created seems to call for a careful statement of our
own position in regard to authoritative standards of
doctrine and worship.

' Names of the Members of the Committee :—
Bishop of Ely (Chairman). Bishop of Meath.

» Aberdeen. » Nassau.

» Albany. » Qu’Appelle.

», Arkansas. 5, Rupertsland.

» . Derry. »» Salisbury.

» Dover. » ot. David's.

» Edinburgh. » sydney.
Grahamstown. », | Western New York.

Bishop in Japan.

Authoritative Standards. 353

This statement is divided into three parts :—first,
as to standards of doctrine and worship which unite
us with the great Body of the Church Universal ;
second, as to those which regulate our internal union
or should be imposed upon Missionary Churches ;
third, as to a manual of doctrine for general use, but
which should not be authoritative.

We recognise before all things, and amidst all
discouragements and divisions, the great bond of an
essential unity which exists amongst all Christians
who own the one Lord Jesus Christ as their Head
and King, who accept the paramount authority of
Holy Scripture, who confess the doctrine of the
Nicene Faith, and who acknowledge one Baptism
into the Name of the Blessed Trinity.

But we cannot regard this measure of unity as ade-
quately fulfilling our Lord’s prayer that His followers
should be one, and we feel, therefore, that it is our
duty to explain our own principles as regards
standards of doctrine and worship, in the humble
hope of preparing the way, so far as in us lies, for the
reunion of Christendom.

We have a duty to the Church Universal ; we have
a duty also towards those who are now distinctly
within our own Communion or who may hereafter be
so closely allied to it as to form practically one body
with ourselves.

As in former Conferences,! we declare that we
continue “united under one divine Head in the
fellowship of the one Catholic and Apostolic Church,
holding the one faith revealed in Holy Writ, defined
in the Creeds, maintained by the primitive Church,”
and “affirmed by the undisputed” Ccumenical
“ Councils,”

1 Supra, pp. 97 and 116.

354 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

In defining our own position more explicitly we

recognise, with the general consent of the Fathers
that the canonical books of the Old and New Testa-
ment “contain all things necessary to salvation,” and.
are the rule and ultimate standard of all Christian
doctrine.
« In addition to the Creed commonly called the
Nicene Creed, to which we have already referred, we,
as a part of the Western Church, have a common
inheritance in the “ Apostles’ Creed,” confessed by us
all in the Sacrament of Baptism. In like manner
we accept the hymn Quzcunque vult, whether or not
recited in the public worship of our Churches, as.
resting upon certain warrant of Scripture, and as
most useful, both at home and in our missions, in
ascertaining and defining the fundamental mysteries.
of the Holy Trinity, and of the Incarnation of our
Blessed Lord; and thus guarding believers from
lapsing into heresy.

In relation to the doctrine of the Procession of the
Holy Spirit, while we believe that there is no funda--
mental diversity of faith between the Churches of the
East and West,! we recognise the historical fact that
the clause Fz/zogue makes no part of the Nicene
Symbol as set forth by the authority of the undivided
Church.

We are of opinion that, as opportunity arises, it
would be well to revise the English version of the
Nicene Creed and of the Quzcunque vulz.

We suggest to the’ Conference that the President
be requested to appoint a Committee for this purpose.

1 The Committee beg to refer, in illustration of this state-
ment, to the important propositions, accepted by Members both
of the Eastern and Western Churches, which were agreed to-
at the Reunion Conference held at Bonn, August 16th, 1875,
under the Presidency of Dr. J. J. I. von Ddllinger. See the
Report of the Proceedings, &c., with a Preface by Dr. Liddon.—
Pickering : London, 1876, pp. 103, 104.

Authoritative Standards. 355

With regard to the authority of the Gicumenical
Councils, our Communion has always recognised the
decisions of the first four Councils on matters of
faith, nor is there any point of dogma in which it
disagrees with the teaching of the fifth and sixth.

The second Council of Niczea commonly called the
seventh Council is, however, not undisputed, and
while we recognise the historical circumstances of the
eight century, which naturally led to the strong
protest against iconoclasm made there, it is our duty
to assert that our Church has never accepted the
teaching of that Council in reference to the venera-
tion of sacred pictures.

IT.

From the standards of doctrine of the Universal
Church which the whole Anglican Communion has
always accepted,' we now pass to those standards of
doctrine and worship which are specially the heritage
of the Church of England, and which are, to a greater
or less extent, received by all her sister and daughter

' “Tet Preachers take care that they never teach anything
in a sermon which they wish to be religiously held and believed
by the people, except what is in accord with the doctrine of the
Old or New Testament, and what the Catholic Fathers and
ancient Bishops have collected from the same doctrine.”—
Canon of 1571, concerning Preachers.

“Such person ἄς. * * shall not in anywise have authority
or power to order, determine or adjudge any matter or cause to
be heresie, but onely such as heretofore have been determined,
ordered or adjudged to be heresie, by the authority of the
Canonical Scriptures or by the first four general Councils or
any of them, or by any other general Counci] wherein the same
was declared heresie by the express and plain words of the
said Canonical Scriptures, or such as hereafter shall be ordered
judged or determined to be heresie, by the High Court of
Parliament of this realm, with the assent of the Clergy in their
Convocation ; anything in this Act contained to the contrary
notwithstanding.”

1 Eviz.1 § XXXVI.

256 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Churches. These are the Prayer Book with its
Catechism, the Ordinal, and the XXXIX. Articles
of Religion.

All these are subscribed by our clergy at ordination
or admission to office, but the XX XIX. Articles are
not imposed upon any person as a condition of
communion. With respect to the Prayer Book and
Articles, we do not consider it an indispensable
condition of inter-communion that they should be
everywhere accepted in their original form, or that
the interpretation put upon them by local courts or
provincial tribunals should be received by every
branch or province of the Anglican Communion. In
illustration of this principle, we would refer to the
differences from the English Order of the Admini-
stration of the Holy Communion which have long
existed in the Scottish and American Churches, and
to the facts that the XX XIX. Articles of Religion
were only accepted in America in the year 1801 with
some variations, and in Scotland in 1804, and that
the Church of Ireland as well as the Church in
America, has introduced some modifications into the
Book of Common Prayer. |
We, however, strongly deprecate any further
material variation in the text of the existing Sacra-
mental offices of the Church, or of the Ordinal, than
is at present recognised among us, unless with the
advice of some Conference or Council representing
the whole Communion.

With regard to the daily offices and such further
forms of service as the exigencies of different
Churches or countries may demand, we feel that they
may be safely left for the present to the action of the
Bishops of each Province. We do not demand a
rigid uniformity, but we desire to see the prevalence
of a spirit of mutual and sympathetic concession,
which will prevent the growth of substantial
divergences between different portions of our
communion. With regard to those Dioceses which
are not yet united into Provinces, we recommend

Authoritative Standards. 357

that the Bishop of the Diocese should not act in the
way of revision of, or additions to, such offices
without the advice of the Archbishop of Canterbury ;
or in the case of foreign Missionary jurisdictions of
the American Church, without the advice of its
Presiding Bishop.

With regard to the XX XIX. Articles of Religion
we thank God for the wisdom which guided our
fathers, in difficult times, in framing statements of
doctrine, for the most part accurate in their language
and reserved and moderate in their definitions. Even
when speaking most strongly and under the pressure
of great provocation, our Communion has generally
refrained from anathemas upon opponents, and we
desire in this to follow those who have preceded us in
the faith. The omission of a few clauses in a few of
the Articles would render the whole body free from
any imputation of injustice or harshness toward those
who differ from us. At the same time we feel that
the Articles are not all of equal value, that they are
not, and do not profess to be, a complete statement
of Christian doctrine, and that, from the temporary
and local circumstances under which they were
composed, they do not always meet the requirements
of Churches founded under wholly different conditions.

Some modification of these Articles may therefore
naturally be expected on the part of newly-constituted
Churches, and particularly in non-Christian lands.
But we consider that it should be a condition of the
recognition of such Churches as in complete inter-
communion with our own, and especially of their
receiving from us our episcopal succession, that we
should first receive from them satisfactory evidence
that they hold substantially the same type of doctrine
with ourselves. More particularly we are of opinion
that the Clergy of such Churches should accept
articles in accordance with the positive statements
of our own standards of doctrine and worship,
particularly on the substance and rule of faith, on
the state and redemption of man on the office of the

| 358 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Church, and on the Sacraments and other special
ordinances of our holy religion.

III.

In the foregoing resolutions we have confined our-
selves to a consideration of existing authoritative
formularies, and to such as may serve the like use
under particular conditions. We are unable, after
careful consideration of the subject, to recommend
that any new declaration of doctrine should, at the
present time, be put forth by authority. We are,
however, of opinion that the time has come when an
effort should be made to compose a manual for
teachers which should contain a summary of the
doctrine of the Church, as generally received among
us. Such a manual would draw its statements of
doctrine from authoritative documents already exist-
ing, but would exhibit them in a completer and more
systematic form. It would, also, naturally include
some explanation of the Services and ceremonies of
the Church. The whole might be preceded by a
historical sketch of the position and claims of our
Communion.

Such a Manual would, we believe, be of great
service both in maintaining the type of doctrine to
which we have referred, and in enabling members of
other Churches to form a just opinion of our doctrines
and worship. We suggest that His Grace the
President be requested to nominate three or more
Bishops to undertake such a work, and, if it seem
good to him and to the other Archbishops, Metro-
politans, and presiding Bishops of the Church, that
they give the work, when completed, the sanction of
their imprimatur. We do not suggest that the
Conference should be asked to undertake this work,
or that it should beregarded as an authoritative
standard of the Church.

Signed on behalf of the Committee,
ALWYNE ELY, Chatrman.

Statement in regard to Dr. Cummiuiis. 359

XXXVI.

A Statement in regard to Ordinations or Consecrations
performed by Dr. Cummins, or others claiming
Ordination or Consecration from him, prepared
by the presiding Bishop of the American Church,
the Right Rev. John Williams, D.D., LL.D.

“Bishop Cummins was consecrated as Assistant-
Bishop of Kentucky, November 15th, 1866. In the
autumn of 1873, he abandoned the Church, and
announced his intention of setting up for himself.
On the 12th of December, 1873, the Bishop of Ken-
tucky (Dr. Benjamin B. Smith) withdrew authority
from him, and inhibited him from the exercise of
Episcopal dutuies,! nder, and in terms of, Title I.,
Canon I5, Sec. 5.

Soon after this, probably on the day following,
Bishop Cummins, assisted by four presbyters, went
through some form of Consecration, by which he
declared that the Rev. Charles E. Cheney, D.D., was
elevated to the Episcopate.

We have considered that in this, so called, Conse-
cration, four things must be taken into account—(1)
the condition of the Consecrator; (2) the act itself;
(3) the service used; and (4) the condition of the
person said to be consecrated.

1.—Bishop Cummins had not been deposed, and
therefore his act, however inconvenient, cannot, so
far as he is concerned, be counted as having no force.
He was, however, acting in the face of canonical
obligations.

An Assistant-Bishop shall perform such Episcopal duties,
-and exercise such Episcopal authority in the Diocese, as the
Bishop shall assign to him.—Title I., Canon 15, Sec. 5.

360 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

2.—The Consecration itself is, clearly, utterly un-
canonical, though, of course, not, fer se, invalid.

3.—How far the Ordinal was used, whether any
sufficient form was employed, we do not know. We
do know, from open and clear declarations of avowed
principles, that there was not even a pretence of
ordaining and consecrating a Bishop in the meaning
and intention of the Ordinal. We do not, of course,
mean in this to affirm that a secretly! held and
unexpressed intention zo¢t to do what the service pur-
ported to do, would invalidate the act. In this
instance, the purpose zot to do what the service
purported to do was openly declared. Under such
circumstances, if the Ordinal were used, the use of it
was nothing short of a mockery.

4.—As to the condition of Dr. Cheney, he was at
that time under sentence of deposition, which sentence
had been canonically pronounced upon him years
before by his Diocesan, the Bishop of Illinois (Dr.

1In referring to the intention of Bishop Cummins, the
Bishops beg to be understood as not implying that an Officer
of any Religious Body can invalidate his official act, by a lack
of intention to use the Offices of that Body for the purposes for
which they were authorised. This is a different case. Bishop
Cummins had ceased to be an Officer of the Church in America.
He was acting for himself. And he not only did not intend,
but by his own statement he intended not to consecrate Dr.
Cheney to the Episcopal Order. Proof of which is found in
the subjoined extracts from his own sermon delivered on the
occasion of the so-called consecration of Dr. Cheney.

“There is no evidence from Scripture that the Apostles
“ established the Episcopate as an order in the Ministry distinct
“from and superior in rank to the Presbyterate. If there is to
‘be found any trace of Episcopacy in the New Testament, it is
“only as an office exercised by one who was himself a fellow-
“ presbyter, commissioned or set apart for the exercise of such
“powers as were rendered necessary by the exigencies of the
“Church, and for the promotion of its well-being by a system
“ of general oversight and superintendence.

“What then is the true position of the Episcopate as it is
“retained in this reformed Episcopal Church, following Holy
“Scripture and the practice of the early Church?

Statement in regard to Dr. Cummins. 361

Whitehouse). In regard to the capacity, so to speak,
of a deposed presbyter to be elevated to the Episco-
pate (which was the crucial question touching Dr.
Cheney), we found that in the well-known case of
Timothy Aelurus, the Bishops of Cappadocia, writing
to the Emperor Leo, asserted that Timothy was, as a
deposed presbyter, incapable “ad majorem currere
dignitatem” (Labbe and Cossart’s Concilia, vol. iv.,
col.956). Wealso found the Bishops of Galatia, writ-
ing to the same Emperor, that a deposed presbyter
was incapable ‘ad majorem gradum ventre”’ (ut sup.,
col. 970).

We could not but regard this view as entirely
reasonable and just. For, hold as strongly as we
may to the indelibility of Holy Orders, grant as fully
as we may that acts done by one, who having been
deposed from an office still continues to do acts per-
taining only to that office, though they are irregular,
may be valid ; it surely does not follow, that such a
person is capable of receiving additional power or of

“1. It is not a continuation of the Apostolate. Bishops are
** not the successors of the Apostles. The Apostles of our Lord
““could have no successors, as their office was of special
“appointment by Christ Himself, endowed with miraculous
“ powers by the Holy Ghost, and could be filled only by those
“‘ who were ‘ eye-witnesses of the majesty,’ and of the ‘ sufferings
“ofJesus. Their Office ceased with their lives, and Holy
“Scripture contains not a suggestion indicating that others
‘*‘ could ever perpetuate their Office in the Church.

“2, The Episcopate is not the depository of the Faith, the
“ Divinely-constituted body to which are committed all gifts of
“grace, as the sole channel through which they can be dis-
“pensed. Holy Scripture warrants us in rejecting such teaching
“as utterly antagonistic to the very spirit and essence of the
** Gospel of the Son of God.

“3. The Episcopate is not an ordinance of Apostolic institu-
“tion, but it was adopted by the post-Apostolic Church as the
‘development of the practice or custom first suggested by the
“Apostles, in delegating to certain of their fellow-labourers
“among the Presbyters the oversight or superintendence of the
“Churches in certain districts temporarily.”

362 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

being elevated to a higher grade in the ministry.
The contrary conclusion would seem to be the more
reasonable one, especially when fortified as it is by
the foregoing facts.

Considering, therefore, (1) the condition of the only
person claiming the Episcopate who acted in the so-
called Consecration ; (2) the extreme irregularity of
the act itself, in performing which there was only one
Bishop—and he the one just spoken of—present ; (3)
the fact that presbyters were associated with him on
the avowed ground that they were just as competent
to act as a Bishop; (4) that we know not what service
was used ; (5) that ifthe Ordinal were used zz verdis
et actibus tpsissimis, it was still used not only with
the secret intention, but with the avowed purpose, of
not doing what it intended should be done; (6) that
on grounds of reason and of precedent, we were
compelled to regard Dr. Cheney as incapable of ©
being elevated to the Episcopate; we were, in a
manner, forced to conclude that the act of Consecra-
tion, so called, of Dr. Cheney, was zfso facto, null and
void.

But, further, on the 24th of February, 1876, Dr.
Cummins and Dr. Cheney, assisted by one Methodist
bishop, one Methodist minister, two Presbyterian
ministers, and six members of the so-called “Re-
formed Episcopal Church,” went through some form
of consecration, by which they declared that the .
Rev. W. R. Nicholson, D.D., was elevated to the
Episcopate.

The same questions that came up in connection
with Dr. Cheney’s so-called Consecration arise here.
It is enough, however, to say, in addition to what has
been already said—-(1) that the condition of the so-
called Consecrator had been changed—and for the
worse—by the fact that on the 24th day of June, 1874,
Dr. Cummins had been deposed by the Presiding
Bishop, with the consent of a majority of the House
of Bishops; (2) that the probabilities of an insufficient

Statement in regard to Dr. Cummins. 363

service and form are greatly increased by the char-
acter and positions of those whose assistance he
employed ; and (3) that Dr. Nicholson had been
canonically deposed several months previous to this,
so-called, Consecration. Our conclusion, therefore
as to him, was the same as that to which we had
before come in the case of Dr. Cheney.

These two Consecrations, so called, are the only
ones at which Dr. Cummins ever officiated ; and all
later ones, as well as all Ordinations of presbyters
and deacons, in what is known as the “ Reformed
Episcopal Church,’ depend on them. For the
reasons then, above given—without asserting that no
other reasons have weighed with individual Bishops—
the Bishops in the United States always ordain those
who apply to be received from, what is commonly
called, the “Cummins Schism,” into the Church.”

At a meeting of the American Bishops present at
the Lambeth Conference, the above statement of the
Presiding Bishop was adopted as the statement of
the Bishops present, and ordered to be presented to
the Conference with the addition of the appended
note, on page 360.

A. CLEVELAND COXE,
WM. CROSWELL DOANE,

GEORGE F. SEYMOUR.

Committee on behalf of the
American Bishops.

2A2

304 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No. XXXVII. (See page 46.)

Sermon preached by the Archbishop of Vork, in St.
Paul's Cathedral, on Saturday, July 28, 1888.

“For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the
manifestation of the sons of God.”—Rom. viii. 19.

THE Apostle in these grand chapters realises the
coming of Christ as a power in the world. Christi-
anity is not, with the Apostle, a saving truth, but a
saving power which Christ has brought into the
world. In chapter vii. he sees man divided and
distracted, with light enough to see the right, but
with will too weak to stand firm in it ; and then the
greatness of the deliverance of the human will from
the power of sin through Christ is contrasted with
it. “QO wretched man that Iam! Who shall deliver
me from the body of this death? I thank God
through Jesus Christ our Lord” (vii. 24, 25). Law
and peace have come through Him, and the quicken-
ing of the mortal body through the in-dwelling Spirit.
Sin is subdued and men are made children of God ;
and if children then heirs; heirs of God, and joint
heirs with Christ (viii. 16,17). But it is impossible
for him not to contrast this ideal of freedom with
the continuing sufferings of the present time. The
creation is still waiting for a redemption, of which
man shall be, in a measure, the instrument. The
present suffering may well be borne, through the
strength of the hope that is before us. Rising to a
sublimer height of diction, the Apostle exclaims that
“ The earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for
the manifestation of the sons of God” (viii. 19).

The Greek word used is a picture in itself. It is
the expectation of a man with head erect, looking
out afar towards the source from which the succour

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 365

is tocome. It presents to the eye the waiting of all
creatures for the manifestation, or further work of
the children of God; groaning meanwhile and travail-
ing in pain. We ourselves who have received the
Spirit groan with the pain of waiting for the complete
redemption in us. “We are saved, indeed, in the
way of hope” (viii. 24), for we still wait in patience.
Persecution, temptation, the falling away of many,
the martyrdom of many, the turning away of the
stream of grace from whole districts and churches,
leaving a barren wilderness in place of the dews and
sweet pastures of the Gospel. For this consummation
we pray for the complete fulfilment; but we know
not what to pray for as we ought, blindly stretching
forwards towards complete redemption.

The Spirit helps our prayers, and “with groanings
which cannot be uttered,” with yearnings within our
souls to which we could give no adequate expres-
sion, stretches forth towards the complete revelation,
towards complete love, clearer knowledge, deeper
peace.

Thus in the time of St. Paul the creation stood in
expectation, with head erect, with far-off look, waiting
for the dawn of that day which should make her
deliverance through Christ complete. St. Paul knew
not what would follow, that after eighteen centuries
the expectant creation should still so stand, waiting
for deliverance. Still the world is full of misery ;
still it waits for redemption: it is as far off from
peace as ever. Strife and struggle, pain and death,
are inscribed upon the world’s foundation-stones.
They are older than the fall of man. Long before
man lived to be tempted and to fall, we find their
history in the stone-book of creation.

He who subjected the creature (creation) to vanity,
to a progress by constant struggle and death towards
a higher condition, in which life, and then man and
self-consciousness and sin and the great redemption
would come to pass, knew His own purpose in so

366 _ Lambeth Conference of 1888.

doing. The creation was made subject to vanity,
that is, to constant change. But He who so made it
knew the issue. He subjected the same in hope.
Only in the way of hope can we yet understand the
great story of the creation.

St. Paul describes three stages of progress. Until
the time of redemption, the whole creation groaned
and travailed; and the growth and entombment of
animal races, the geologic changes (some gradual,
some paroxysmal), the appearance of man, the rise
and ruin of Empires, the civilisations that bloomed
and died down into desolation were but parts of its
torments. There came, secondly, the time in which
Paul writes, when the way of holiness and love was
opened out, and new strength given to obey God.

And now the Spirit helps the redeemed to pray
for the last period, that of complete deliverance ; and
still they know not fully what to pray for as they
ought. And this last stage of waiting has been made
bitter by the contamination of the Church itself by
vanity ; that is, by strife and disunion, and loss of
love. Already in St. Paul’s time, strife was not
unknown. He did not see “ Diocletian’s fiery sword
work busy as the lightning;” nor the Asiatic Churches
of the Apocalypse swept away by Mahometan swords ;
nor the apathy and faithlessness in the Church itself;
nor the corruptions of practice which at times have
obscured the faith, still held in words and still pro-
fessed.

We have waited nearly two thousand years, and
the language held by those who have lost faith is
that they can wait no more; that the power of Christ
is no more seen. “ When the Hebrews,” says one
of these writers, “were on their way to the promised
land, they perceived that God was with them. God
had spoken and had said, ‘It lies before you’; and
by night a cloud of fire kindled and marched in their
van. Now the celestial light is extinct. We are not
quite sure that we have God over our heads. We

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. .ο 367

possess no other light but our understanding, and
with this glimmering guidance we must direct our-
selves through the night. Oh! that we could still
be sure that there was a promised land; that others
besides us would reach it; that this desert would
end in something. This certainty is taken from us;
and yet we advance continually, pushed forward by
an indefatigable hope.”?!

Beyond doubt, if the power of the Lord is gone, all
is gone. He is not a doctrine; but a power. Sur-
rounded by the sick and maimed, He heals them.
When He speaks of the Divine Law He does not
fear to complete and enlarge it. What is the power
which enables men to live no longer to themselves ?
“The love of Christ constraineth us,” replies St. Paul;
and the word “constraineth” denotes a real com-
pelling force.

Examine the history of the Church for the first
century, from the Day of Pentecost onwards. The
records are scanty; but the world vibrated to the
tread of that power. Historians hardly mention the
name of Christ ; but the power is working. Ifit were
indeed true that the power had spent itself ; that
Christianity, like the moon among planets, were a spent
region,—airless, waterless, lifeless—we should seek
perforce another guide. But is itso? Gathered here
from all corners of the earth, we ought to be able to
find an answer. Has material civilisation supplanted
faith? Let brothers answer from America, Australia,
and New Zealand. They are colonies of yesterday :
their first years were as always a struggle for bread.
At first they gave refuge to our criminal class. They
did not start with all the apparatus of a traditional
religion. Nowallare the scene of flourishing churches.
A Christian zeal more fruitful, in reference to popula-
tion, by far than our own, has grown up on the soil.
The feeling that civilisation is in itself sufficient for

i Guyan, “ Irreligion de l’Avenir,” p. 337.

368 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

human progress without religion, finds no counten-
ance from this last chapter of the world’s history.
The complaint now is not that the voice of religion is
not heard ; but rather that the voices of jarring creeds
aretoomany. The air is torn with the jangling bells
of many churches.

Apply what test you will: the test of numbers ;
of holy works ; of saintly souls ; Christian progress is
advancing, not receding. Missions have done more
in this century than ever before. In a word, that
thought which underlies St. Paul’s account—namely,
that creation stood waiting for its own final redemp-
tion, of which man should be the instrument, need
not be abandoned now on the ground that man no
longer shares the Divine strength.

Is it then true, that the power of man is or ever
can be able to work out, by Divine aid, the redemp-
tion of creation ?

Two lines of conquest over the powers of dark-
ness go on together: the one overcoming physical
obstacles, and the other spiritual. The physical pro-
gress moves at an increasing rate. It began far back
in history ; and depends on the mental energies of
man. Even the Syrian desert is not mere sand and
rock, but consists of excellent soil, desert only by
reason of man’s neglect. The barren sides of Lebanon
have once had beautiful terraces in high cultivation.
The terraces remain, but the culture has ceased with
man’s apathy or relapse towards barbarism. In all
civilised countries the soil is useful exactly in the
degree in which man’s energy defends it from return-
ing to wildness. Modern discoveries have in two
ways lengthened life: by preserving health on one
side, and by crowding into a given time far more
achievement.

We, who could not be heard for 100 feet, can now
speak under the ocean 3,000 miles. We can go and
return in a single day over distances which to our
great grandfathers would require a week ; and when

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 369

we think of what are called the Miracles of Science,
we are exhilarated by the conviction that the dis-
coveries of the next decade are likely to be more in
number, and more wonderful than those of the last
decade, over which we have not yet ceased to be
astonished. All these conquests are gifts of God to
man, and obtained through man. They are poured
out profusely ; and at the same time they are educat-
ing the race that discovers them into higher skill;
and the race which produces more Newtons, and
Watts and Nasmyths, more Harveys and Pasteurs,
will become the channel of a greater flow of benefi-
cent inventions.

The other road of progress is the spiritual. On
that road the pace is slower, the results more unequal,
and there are intervals of heartbreaking failure, and
retrogression. And yet the gifts of God are great.
They cannot be overlooked or denied ; and they de-
pend upon the action of man, on the vigour of his
faith, on the completeness of his devotion. “ How
shall they believe in Him of whom they have not
heard ; and how shall they hear without a preacher.”
The Most High speaks no more to us in prophetic
vision, or by a voice from Heaven. He inspires souls
with the power of His spirit; He accumulates, if I
may Say so, in the vessel of man the Divine electric
fire through which spiritual work must be done.
There is no other way in the present course of His
working. If there are no mez of faith, neither faith
nor the fruits of faith can be upon the earth. When
we are twitted with the languid life of the Christian
Churches, as compared with the splendid activity and
performance of science, the inference is not that there
is no longer any guidance, for there is much; but
that men who profess to be Christian show a languid
and intermittent life, a hypothetical belief, instead of
the Apostles’ categorical conviction; a perpetual com-
promise with modern views ; an eyesight made false
and double by the endeavour to work for double

370 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

ends. How shall such an engine accomplish a sub-
stantial share in the great reform and progress which
it is at once the privilege and the duty of the Christian
Church to carry on? The spiritual progress has
never preserved in past centuries a steady and equal
pace. No period of twenty years has ever equalled
the grand outpouring of life of the first twenty years
after the Resurrection.

No century has been like the first. In the seventh
century, churches that had once been faithful, had
become deserts, sunless and dewless; fit only, as it
seemed, to be visited with the destroying swords of
Mohammed. But the law has always been the same.
Churches have prospered when peopled by faithful
men, they have languished or died when faith has
languished and sin has paralysed the will. “The
river of grace” never runs dry it is true; but it often
changes its course to water new districts, and leaves
in its old channel nothing but arid sands. Faith will
never be extinct; but it is not tied to any of the
places which it enlightens; it leaves behind it a
frightful night to those who have despised the day,
and it carries its rays to purer eyes.

Let this be the last word which we all carry away
from this our conference. Christ isa power; a power
of faith and love, which wrought the salvation of the
human race. He comes to us and imparts to us His
nature; all the stages of his earthly history are re-
peated in us: the tender infant birth of faith, the
growth to perfect manhood, the temptations and the
resistance and self-denial, the crucifixion of the old,
and the resurrection to the new life, and the affections
set thereafter upon things in heaven. If this union is
real, if we have done nothing to weaken it, we are
like Him; we are of Him; weare one with Him, and
His power is with us. There is no other source of
strength. And on the other hand, a nature so united

1 Fenelon.

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 371

to the Lord cannot be hid, but must be strong and
prevail, and a Church where such men are found
must needs abound with the fruits of grace. To us,
if the Apostle is right, the true progress of the world
is committed, and the world is waiting even now for
the manifestation of the sons of God. We turn from
contemplating with pride the growth of churches, the
number of chief pastors added to our counsels, the
yearning after closer union one with another, to admit
once more the fact that each of us stands with regard
to his fellows, quite alone, either gifted with the spirit
of Christ, and if so, a storehouse of Divine power for
good ; or else having a name to live, whilst he has
lost hold of the love of Christ, and then nothing can
proceed from him,in whom is neither savour, nor
will, nor strength.

Now the sins and miseries which yet remain cannot
be overcome by mere civilisation. The tools she can
use suit not this work; the results she arrives at in-
tensify the evils. Think of a single day in London:
how human creatures groan and travail, knowing as
yet no redemption by Divine or by any love, from sin
and sorrow. The night closes over the day of struggle,
but rest comes not with the dark. Men watch round
death-beds, and while they sorrow feel that death, at
least, is rest. .Houseless wanderers are fortunate who
can sleep unobserved under a tree ; some of them (I
know it) have learned to sleep upon their feet, to
whom the doorstep is forbidden, who are only allowed
such sleep as can consist with “moving on.” The
servants of pleasure are still astir; the pleasure that
is made up of drink and shameless appetite, which
must not be called brutal in justice to the brute.
Under cover of night, loves that are worse than
hatreds work themselves out. Between the loud roar
of day and the dull throbbing of night there is a
difference, but sin never ceases in this crowd of four
millions for whom Jesus did once surely die. Con-
sider, too, the poverty as well as the sin: wealth was

272 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

never greater; poverty was never more stark and
grinding. Westwards there are streets and squares
of palaces, charged to the full with every contrivance
of luxury, such as no medizval queen could have
dreamed of. Eastward there are dwellings far more
numerous, upon which none of those luxurious in-
ventions have lighted. In many of them a few help-
less, shivering women try to keep continuous the
miserable meals which barely stave off starvation
upon the few daily pence which their work is judged
to be worth. Our boasted progress has made both
the wealth and the poverty. If the progress become
more rapid, we do not see why the riches may not
grow greater and the poverty more deadly. We com-
passionate the poor; we are indignant with those
who stand next them and do not seem to help; we
wax angry with what is called the “ sweating system,”
which, after all, is sometimes an attempt to brigade
and organise in workshops a number of helpless crea-
tures whose labour is so little worth that if it were
not organised it would earn no wage at all. We have
been considering, amongst other topics, the Socialism
which is now making itself felt in every country.
Socialism is not so much a system or a discovery, as
an outcry of hungry despair. Its idea is that nothing
can be worse than the present social state, and that
any change, even through a universal conflagration
of that system, must be an improvement, for what
exists is evil beyond conception. Many of its reme-
dies are childish and contradictory. A revival of old
experiments that have failed ; abolish heirship and
succession ; organise workshops without the power to
dismiss useless workmen, and so on. Mere hunger
lies at the root of Socialism.

The terrible element of this question is that our
present progress aggravates both extremes ; doubling
the pile of the rich, and halving the wages of an in-
creasing number of the poor. The quick progress of
science does not help it. Against the slower progress

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 373

of spiritual improvement it is the chief resisting ele-
ment. You cannot always shut your eyes to this
terrible problem of the poor. You may not fear that
they will ever destroy society, they are too weak and
helpless for that ; but still, even the most flaccid con-
science must be uneasy. We may sleep in our beds,
because starving hands can brandish no weapon and
kindle no torch; but still our sleep cannot be so
sound if we know that brothers and sisters are starv-
ing around us. Who has said, “ The murmurs of the
poor are just. Why this inequality of conditions?
Formed as we all are out of the same dust, there is no
way of justifying this except in saying that God has
commended the poor to the rich, and has assigned
them their maintenance out of their superfluity.” It
was not a communist. The words are the words of
Bossuet.

Now I repeat, that in these two fields, Social pro-
gress is well-nigh powerless, and certainly cannot hope
to bring out a social system from them which shall
be agreeable to the law of love. Competitive trade,
brilliant inventions, the hope of profit, have made
many rich ; but in the nature of the case, the great
commercial machine stands sometimes still, and then
the capital of the rich remains ; but the labour, which
is the capital of the poor, lies useless, and they starve.
The power of Christ, on the other hand, which has
wrought such wonders in the past, ennobling the
family life, affirming the equal rights of all redeemed
men, building the hospital, freeing the slave, organ-
ising the care of the poor, exists still ; and if it seems
weaker, it is owing to the weaker faith of His
followers. Let us more actively affirm the doctrine
of love to others; let us apply it to thoughtless
marriages ; to intemperance ; to want of thrift—the
chief causes of the helplessness of the people. Let
us speak of avarice as our Lord and His Apostles
speak of it, as a deadly sin; let us explain the sin-
fulness of luxury; let us charge wealth with its

374 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

proper trusts, its Christian claims; let us remind Dives
that it is a sin against Christ even to refuse 20 think
of Lazarus at the gate; and results as glorious will
follow as those which attended the march of the
Saviour in earlier times. Are there not facts to
prove it? The great increase of expenditure on
missions during this century ; the splendid examples
of individual philanthropy ; all these teach us that at
this moment we have not reached the summit of
human endeavour, but only the first ridge from
which we can see, not the downward slope, but alps
rising behind alps, which we may not pronounce
unattainable until we have tried them. Nor is our
power over sin diminished. A hundred years ago,
men classed with miracles the conversion of a Mag-
dalen. Now you may call it a miracle still ; but it is
part of the daily organised work of every complete
church, and is blessed with daily success. A century
ago the criminal class was looked on as hopeless, and
was only dealt with by the severest repression ; now
the reformatory snatches, in early boyhood, the pre-
destined thief and social_pest, and trains them to
good, and loads his neck with the beneficent yoke of
the moral law, which he will not wish to cast off. We
do not discuss it as a possibility ; it is part of the
Church’s constant work. Every Christian man is a
storehouse of the power and will of Jesus Christ.

If we have failed to make Christ’s purpose known
and to manifest His love, we must bear our own sin,
and confess it; we must not say that the power of
Christ has gone out of the world. It is not the men
of high Christian endeavour, who come before us,
whining that there is no guidance ; it is not the man
of prayer, who announces that he has tried to find
Christ in prayer, and failed to find Him. No! belief
strengthens belief; fresh talents are added where
talents are. The complaints that religion is ex-
hausted come from those who have not striven to
shape their life according to the truth they knew;
weak, perplexed, exhausted, they are ready to be-

Sermon of the Archbishop of York. 375

come the prey of the first who shall say, “ The world
is dark and lost ; evil has conquered ; God we can-
not know!” The power of Christ manifested in
believers has conquered unbelief, has won over souls,
in every age, in every country, against every hinder-
ance. Christianity once consisted of five disciples
that followed Christ: it has grown to a countless
multitude. The work has been done between these
two points by believing men. On the last night of our
Lord’s ministry all the disciples “forsook Him and
fled.” That is put before us, not without intention, as
the result of His personal teaching, to show that the
multitudes, whom no man can number, have been the
fruits of Apostles and messengers and believers, in
whom the power of Christ was.

Go forth! brethren, beloved, to your glorious work
amongst the nations of the earth. You will leave
behind you kindly memories for those who have
listened to your loving counsels.

Go forth! and tell every believer that the power of
Christ is his, if he will use it. We may say nay! We
are bound to say “ Who is sufficient for these things?”
We are not permitted to say that the work against
sin and misery can no longer go on, for that is the
work of God and Christ, who gives in daily proofs,
undeserved that He is working with us still. Go forth!
and when social progress makes its claim for great
things done, admit the claim ; but claim at the same
time to be workers in another field of progress, by the
spiritual power of Christ. Thecreation (to recall the
apostle’s image) stands with head erect in expectation
of deliverance from afar; and many a heart will fail
before that deliverance come,and many a weak faith
will wither ; many a sufferer will cry, “ How long?”
many will ask, “Art thou He that should come?”

With head erect, looking afar towards the grow-
ing dawn, we will stand in patient éxpectation.
“ Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a
crown of life.”

376 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

No. XXXVIII. (See page 47.)

EPISTOLA CENTUM QUADRAGINTA QUINQUE EPIS-
COPORUM IN ANGLIA CONGREGATORUM IN
PALATIO LAMBETHANO MENSE IULIO ANNO
SALUTIS MDCCCLXXXVIII.

Fidelibus in Christo Tesu salutemt.

Nos Archiepiscopi, Metropolitani, aliique Episcopi
Sancte Catholice Ecclesie, centum quadraginta
quinque numero, cum Ecclesia Anglicana pleno iure
communicantes, super diceceses proprias iurisdic-
tionem episcopalem exercitantes vel ad episcopalia
munia in eis obeunda legitime delegati, a diversis
orbis terrarum regionibus congregati in Palatio
Lambethano anno Dominice Incarnationis
MDCCCLXXXVIII, presidente reverendissimo
Presule Edwardo Divina Providentia Archiepiscopo
Cantuariensi totius Angliz Primate et Metro-
politano, in dicti palatii sacello participes facti sacro-
sanctorum mysteriorum corporis et sanguinis Domini
nostri Iesu Christi et orationibus adunati ad Spiritus
Sancti directionem impetrandam, de questionibus
compluribus nobis propositis consilium inivimus,
ad salutem populi Dei et ad statum Ecclesie per
diversas mundi partes diffuse pertinentibus.

His quzstionibus sedulo et serio deliberandis
mensem integrum impendimus, tum publico conventu
tum extra conventum quibuscunque res singulz
delegate erant. Nunc demum ea que de his rebus
nobis placuerunt fidelibus in Christo commendamus.

Huic epistole duplicem documentorum seriem
adiunximus, quarum prima Sententias Conventus
sollemnes continet altera delegationum singularum
Relationes. Illud autem memoria tenendum eorum
solum que in priore genere continentur rationem
a Conventu nostro esse petendam. Delegationum

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 377

enim Relationes in tantum Conventus animum
exprimere credende sunt, quantum in Sententiis
vel rursus confirmate sint vel ipsis verbis in
Sententiis excipiantur. Sed operz pretium habuimus
has Relationes typis exprimere cum _ locupletem
videantur meditationi vestre materiam suppeditare.*

Imprimis vero quzstionibus moralibus ad vitae
regimen utilibus, que Conventui proposite erant,
animadverti volumus; et his omnibus preeponimus
quz dicenda sunt de officio Ecclesiae ad temperan-
tiam et castitatem promovendam.

De Temperantia circa potus temulentos.

Multos per annos viri magnanimi, sibi minime
parcentes, fortiter connisi sunt ad ebrietatem abo-
lendam, quorum conatus ut multiplici auctu, crescant
sedulo optamus. Mala enim que ex hoc peccato
ecclesiz et genti nostre oriuntur, vix verbis supra
veritatem augeri possunt. Sed moneri vos oportet
ne sententiz false aures prebeatis que si latius
irrepat bono operi et magno damnum illatura est.
Cum enim utilissimam credamus abstinentiam circa
potus temulentos que absoluta vocetur (¢otal absti-
. nence), Si pro instrumento ad finem bonum habeatur,
eas tamen voces improbare volumus que usum vini
in se damnant nulla ratione habita eorum que vel
nobis vel aliis insequantur ; et reprehendi a nobis
significavimus consuetudinem quorundam, qui, ut
fertur, in sacris mysteriis celebrandis alio liquore
utuntur; que consuetudo ex hac sententia tacite
concepta originem duxisse videtur.

[ Sententza I1.—Pronuntiant episcopi in hoc Con-
ventu congregati usum succi ex uvis non fermentati
vel alius cuiuscunque liquoris quam veri vini, vel aqua
mixti vel meraci, pro elemento calicis in Sacra

* In hac interpretatione Sententias illas propriis Epistolz
locis subiunximus, quantum necesse erat ad Epistolam intelle-
gendam, et Relationum tantum quod omitti non poterat.

2 2B

478. Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Communione administrandi, exemplo Domini non
esse consentaneum et ab Ecclesiz Catholice con-
suetudine pervicacius recedere. ]

De Castitate Vite.

Contra vero his ultimis temporibus vix tandem
Christianz societatis conscientia experrecta est ut
enaviter agendum esse sentiat ad castitatem vite
vindicandam. Nos ergo hance occasionem arripere
volumus, que ex distantibus terrarum regionibus eos
congregavit qui Communionis Anglicanze personam
gerunt, ut sacrum bellum adversus hoc peccatum edi-
camus, quod ante omnia corpus Christi coinquinat et
sancti Spiritus templum polluit. Graves et serias voces
Relationis in memoriam redigimus; nihil enim nisi
communem omnium Christianorum operam huic malo
cohibendo sufficere credimus. Provocamus igitur vos
ut succurratis discipline sanctz et severe ; et appel-
lamus omnes, ad quos hzc vox nostra pervenerit, ut
coniunctis viribus iudicium hominum de his rebus
castigemus, et traditiones ignobiles et corruptas
penitus aboleamus, que non solum nomen Magistri
nostri Christi dedecorent,-sed etiam naturam huma-
nam in imagine Dei factam ignominia afficiant.

[Relatio Delegatorum de hac re omnibus Episcoptis
tla placuit ut nec addere quidguam nec detrahere
voluerint. |

De Sanctitate Matrimoniz,

Huic rei necessario coniuncta est conservatio sanc-
titatis matrimonii, de qua tota virtus publica pendet.
Damnum autem huic sanctitati non minimum
illatum est, legibus in quibusdam regionibus latis,
per quas pluribus de causis quam antea factum erat
divortium conceditur. Przceptum igitur Christi de
ea re iterum a nobis asseverandum censuimus, et
clericis nostraa Communionis consilia damus quales
se prestare debeant adversus eos qui contra legem
Domini deliquerint.

[Sententia 1V.—(A). Cum Domini nostri verba

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 379

divortium diserte prohibeant, excepta fornicationis
vel adulterii causa, non alia certe de causa, preter
exceptam, divortium agnoscere potest ecclesia Chris-
tiana, neque quocunque modo ratum facere matrimo-
nium cuiuscunque persone, contra hanc legem
separate, persona altera superstite.

(Β.) Matrimonio ob fornicationem vel adulterium
dissoluto, nequaquam oportet personam nocentem
benedictione ecclesiastica in secundas nuptias haberi
dignam, superstite persona innocente.

(c.) Cum cognoverimus diversas semper in ecclesia
fuisse sententias, matrimonio ob adulterium dissoluto,
utrum voluerit Dominus necne a secundis nuptiis
personam innocentem prohibere, consilium dat. Con-
ventus ne clerici admoneantur ut a sacramentis
ceterisque ecclesie privilegiis eos arceant, qui
civilibus legibus concedentibus ita nuptias inierint.]

De Polygamia.

Sanctitas matrimonii, quale inter Christianos con-
trahitur fideli coniunctione unius viri cum una femina
constat usquedum coniunctio illa morte dissolvatur,
Gentium quidem paganarum polygamicas societates
inter omnes constat a lege Christi damnari; quzs-
tionibus autem multis et difficilibus dant locum,
que preterito tempore variis modis solute sunt. Nos
vero cum ea omnia perspexerimus quz missionarii
ex variis regionibus diversa retulerint, nihil sane
de rebus pauxillis statuere voluimus, quas praesi-
dentibus ecclesiarum per loca constitutis decidendas
reliquimus, sed preecepta quedam gravioris momenti
dedimus, quibus solis credimus missionarios tuto
dirigi posse. Imprimis. vero nobis cure fuit ut
Christianam matrimonii notionem salvam atque in-
columem servaremus, successus illos, qui aliter protinus
et cito fierent in evangelio propagando, minimum
valere rati si hac notione imminuta vel confusa redi-
merentur.

[Sententia V.—(A.) Conventui placuit ad bap-

a a2

380 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

tismum non admittendos eos qui in polygamia
vivant, sed inter catechumenos habendos, et dis-
cipline Christiane subiciendos donec possint se ad
legem Christi conformare.

(B). Conventui visum est polygamorum virorum
feminas ad baptismum nonnunquam admitti posse,
sed presidentibus ecclesiz per loca constitutis iudi-
cium relinquendum esse quo tempore et quibus
condicionibus tales baptizari expediat.]

De dte Dominica.

Digna Dominice observatio, ut diei requietis cultus
divini et evangelice institutionis, recta via ad Chris-
tianz societatis salutem et incolumitatem confert.
Proximis vero temporibus hanc diem minus ac
minus diligenter observari animadvertimus, unde
sanctitas eius in discrimen veniat. Hoc _ igitur
maxime deprecati, hortamur eos qui otio fruuntur
ne commodorum suorum gratia occasiones requietis
et cultus divini aliis subtrahant. Dominos et opera-
rum conductores hortamur ut famulis et opificibus
iura studiose conservent. Dies enim Dominica pro
hereditate inzstimabili nobis habenda est; qua si
quis abutitur metuendo iudicio obnoxius est.

[Sententia VII.—(A:) Conventui visum est obser-
vantiam religiosam unius diei ex septem, quarto
mandato sancitam, lege divina hominibus iniungi.

(B) Usque ab resurrectione Domini primam heb-
domadis a Christianis observatam fuisse, ut cultui
divino et requieti propriam, et Dominicze nomine
insignitam in sabbati locum paullatim successisse,
cum pro festo magno a Christiana ecclesia singulis
hebdomadibus celebraretur.

(c). Observantiam Dominic, ut diei requietis cul-
tus divini et doctrine sacre, inzestimabili bono fuisse
omnibus regionibus Christianis per quas obtinuerit.

(D). Observantiz huius neglegentiam, in dies cres-
centem, sanctitatem eius et utilitatem in maximum
discrimen adducere.

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 481

(E). Maxime deprecandam esse consuetudinem
quorundam ordinum hominum, qui divitiis otioque
abundent, iam latius se diffundentem, ut Dominica
die ad delectationes huius mundi abutantur.

(F). Illud maxime evitandum ne quid ab illa
requie deroget, qua in hac die famuli aeque ac
magistri, et opifices aque ac operarum conductores,
iure frui debent.]

De Soctalismo.

His ad mores spectantibus arctissime coheret
quzstio quomodo se gerere debeat Ecclesia Chris-
tiana adversus hodiernas de vita publica controversias.
Cum enim immodica varietate bona huius mundi
distribuantur, cum hic divitiz ingentes accumulentur,
et illic miseranda conspiciatur inopia, necesse est
multis et anxiis cogitationibus turbari eum qui
mentem Christi induere velit. Nihil igitur consi-
deratione dignius, vel clericis vel laicis, quam ques-
tiones de Socialismo qui vocatur agitate. Meditatio
autem de propositis que ad zqualitatem tendant
circa huius mundi bona, et leta susceptio eorum
quz a quoquam vel bene suscepta vel bene gesta
sint, cum excogitatione rationum quibus, sive legum
latione, sive societate voluntaria, sive alio modo quo-
cunque pacifice et sine seditione aut iniuria queestiones
iste ad solutionem perducende sint, hec inter
nobilissima studia reputamus quibus viri, qui Christi
vestigiis insistere velint, semet ipsos dedere potuerint.
Presto sunt autem in Relatione que ad solutionem
harum controversiarum conferre videantur.

De Migrantibus.

Unum autem hominum genus prez ceteris Con-
ventus nostri cura et humanitate dignum esse vide-
batur. Migrantium enim numerus Britannicarum
insularum ecclesias ecclesia Americanz et coloniarum
nostrarum ecclesiis vivo vinculo alligat. Nihil igitur

382 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Conventus nostri deliberationibus magis erat proprium
quam, quid huic tantz multitudini debeamus reputare
qui communem nobiscum sortiti sint fidem. Illud
certe, si quid aliud, ecclesiz est officium, ut profectos
ex antiqua patria in novam benevolis oculis per
totum iter consequatur, ut cura vigili respiciat, et
pericula que circa viam et animz eorum et spiritui
insidientur avertat. Sunt vero in Relatione non-
nulla que credamus ad hanc finem conferre posse.

De certa circa Fidem Doctrina.

Cum igitur de his questionibus ita decreverimus
ut preceptis Domini et evangelice discipline, qua-
tenus aut privatorum hominum mores, aut vitam
publicam tangant, primum locum tribuamus, ea iam
perscrutemur que ecclesiz partim habeant vel partim
possint prospicere ad ea fidei principia tradenda qui-
bus illa morum disciplina fundata sit.

Nobis vero persuasum est hoc opus magna
diligentia et emendatione multa indigere. Juniorum
enim institutioni circa religionem multa desunt,
preesertim ubi de doctrina Christiana agitur. Que
incommoda non unum tantum ordinem hominum
tangunt, sed et laicos accingere se oportet ut cum
clericis huic malo medeantur. Et parentibus quidem
hoc opus a Deo mandatum est. Susceptores autem
monendi sunt ut officium in parvulos, pro quibus in
baptismo responderint, fideliter expleant, et caveant
ne indocti maneant vel minus parati ad sigillum
Confirmationis accedant. Catechizandi autem usus
in propatulo habitus et preparatio eorum sollemnis
qui ad Confirmationem instituuntur in maius provehi
sine dubio possunt. Simul et cura magis assidua
et studio clericorum diligentiore indigent schole que
vocantur dominicales, quam ut multis in locis res
nunc se habet. Institutio autem eorum qui in
huiusmodi scholis doceant, et alumno-przeceptorum
(pupil teachers) in scholis que feruntur elementa-
ribus, opus si quid aliud necessarium parocho et

Latin. Version of the Encyclical Letter. 383

pastori credendum est. Porro oportet pastorem
morum precepta que ex Bibliis trahit ita confirmare
ut discipulos iterum atque iterum ad sanctiones legis
divine revocet et ad congrua doctrine et disciplinze
exempla que in iisdem scripturis reperiuntur. Possunt
autem, etiam amplius quam nunc fit, contionantes
in ecclesia fidei simul et moribus consulere, et
rationi divinorum officiorum lucem afferendo audien-
tes perducere ut intellegant quali inter se vinculo
coniungantur cultus Dei et fides et opera—id est quid
doceant Liber Precum publicarum, et Catechismus
et Symbola.

Non tamen propter iuniores tantum, vel propter
eos quos gregibus suis adscriptos habent, clericos
oportet certz et accurate fidei doctrine studere.

Meditatio certe sacrz Scripture exercitationis
ingenii Christianis magna pars est, et Biblia ipsa
precipuum omnis doctrine circa religionem instru-
mentum est. Miserum vero dictu, his temporibus,
multi ex multis locis quasi signo dato Bibliorum
auctoritatem impugnant, neque ut divine scientie
thesaurum accipi sinunt; et per omnes hominum
ordines increbrescunt suspiciones, dubitationes, cen-
sure infeste et iudicia incredula eorum dogmatum
que veritate divinitus revelata fundata sunt.

Quandocunque igitur talia originem. traxerint ex
ignorantia rationis quze constare debeat inter scientiam
rerum nature et Revelationem Dei, possunt certe et
debent patienter et cum benevolentia tractari. Quod
si physicorum sive inventis sive effatis conturbantur
mentes hominum, magnopere curandum est ne
elementa fidei extinguantur, et regenda magis ingenia
quam coercenda ut veritatem perspiciant, talibus in-
ventis leges naturz in lucem proferri, quibus recte
intellectis opus Creatoris magnificum, verbo virtutis
Eius sustentatum, amplius et zquius estimetur.

Periculum vero maius ex hac oppugnatione oritur,
sive plane infesta sive mere incredula dicenda sit,
utpote difficile nobis. sit definire, quatenus doctrina

284 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

nostra, vel saltem populi de ea iudicium, videatur
satis habere rationem earum sententiarum de Sacre
Scripture inspiratione et presertim de Veteris Testa-
menti dispensatione et disciplina, que, quamvis in
ecclesia nunquam diserte sancitz sint,ex longo tamen
tempore et multis in locis obtinuerint.

Monendi sunt clerici ut caute et diligenter has
controversias tractent, et studiosius hortandi ut ad
unum quasi fundamentum doctrinam suam omnem
referant,ad Dominum scilicet nostrum Iesum Christum,
sacrificium pro peccatis nostris, impietatis nostre
medicinam, vitz omnis spiritualis fontem, conscientize
voluntatique nostre et normam et exemplar omnium
virtutum. Ad Ipsum certe et ad opus Ipsius doctrina
omnis Veteris Testamenti confluit, ex Ipso Novi
Testamenti doctrina omnis derivatur et spiritu et
virtute et specie. Ecclesiz autem est ita operari ut
bona ea, que ex Incarnatione Verbi Dei fluxerint, ad
vite usum adhibeat et latius proferat, et doctrina
ecclesia propagatio est dogmatum que super ipsam
Incarnationem fundata sint quomodo in Symbolis
colliguntur.

De ture mutuo diversarum partium Anglicane
Communzonis.

Ex disceptatione nostra de iure mutuo dicecesium
et regionum nostre Communionis nonnulla saltem
prodierunt quz iudicio vestro commendari volumus.
Primum quidem necesse videtur ad regulas a Conventu
anni MDCCCLXXVIII. propositas animadvertere,
et rursus monere intra Communionis nostre fines
acta cuiusvis ecclesiz vel Provinciz, recte et ordine
significata, ab aliis ecclesiis et ab his qui in illis con-
versantur, in honore habenda esse; ne quis sive
Episcopus seu clericus in dicecesi iure constituta
sine permissione Episcopi qui ibidem sit ministret ;
ne quis vero Episcopus clericum quemquam ex alia
Dicecesi venientem ad sacra ministeria admittat sine
litteris commendaticiis idoneis. Harum enim regu-

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 385

larum neglegentia gravium interdum scandalorum
occasio facta est. Episcopi quidem, quod ad eos
attinet, a talibus malis preecavere parati sunt consilium
privatim dando simul cum consuetis et formatis
litteris ; sed et clericos decet cautius versari, cum
tales litteras obsignaturi sint ; eos quoque, qui his
litteris utuntur, cavere oportet ne graventur si accurate
quesitum fuerit qui sint ipsi ut quales. Hae enim
quzestiones, quamquam ipsis fortasse supervacanez
esse videantur, omnino tamen necessariz sunt ut in
hac re saluti ecclesiz satisfiat.

Cavendum certe maxime est ubi de clericis agitur
ad sacra ministeria in coloniis nostris capessenda
ordinatis. Enimvero libentissime concedimus eos
qui ztatis robur in peregrinos labores impenderint,
seu tandem in patria requiescere seu consueta opera
novis mutare voluerint, dignos esse quibus consulatur.
Sed de hac re generatim decernere impossibile est.

Illa autem quzstio nobis quasi maioris momenti
proponebatur utrum Concilium vel Concilia institui
possent rerum referendarum gratia, que de contro-
versiis consilium darent vel etiam decernerent a
prepositis Provinciarum Colonice ecclesiz appellata.
Qua de re nobis videtur diutissime et consideratissime
deliberandum, ne cito ac temere potestatem con-
stituamus quz sive pro Concilio habita sive Iudicio
publico propior, tum disciplines nostre tum libertati
detrimentum allutura sit.

De Christianorum apud nos domestica reconciliatione.

Post anxiam disceptationem satis habuimus
articulos aliquos proponere, qui pro fundamento
sint a quo progressi, Deo favente, ad domesticam
Christianorum reconciliationem propius accedere
possimus. Qui articuli, quattuor numero, in Sententiis
appositis reperientur. ᾿

[Sententia ΧΙ. Conventui placuit hos articulos,
Deo favente, pro fundamento fore a quo progressi
ad reconciliationem domesticam propius accedamus:—

386 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

(A) Sacras Scripturas veteris novique Testamenti
utpote “omnia ad salutem necessaria continentes,”
cum pro regula veritatis et norma legitima in rebus
fidei habendz sint.
᾿ς (B) Symbolum Apostolicum quod in baptismate
pronuntiatur, et Nicenum quod fidei Christiane
idoneam expositionem continet.

(C) Sacramenta duo a Christo ipso instituta—
Baptisma scilicet et cenam Domini—dummodo
Christi verba in prima institutione usurpata, et
elementa quibus ipse usus est semper usurpentur.

(Ὁ) Episcopatum ex antiquis seculis traditum,
ratione quidem administrationis gentium necessitati-
bus accommodatum et populorum a Deo in ecclesize
unitatem vocatorum.

Sententia XII. Conventus noster prepositos variis
Communionis. nostre regionibus enixe rogat, ut,
quantum fieri possit una agentes, notum faciant se
paratos esse ad fraterna colloquia (sicuti ab
Americana Ecclesia iam propositum fuerit) eos acci-
pere qui aliarum Christianarum societatum in gentibus
Anglicizantibus personas gerant consilii capiendi
causa, quomodo vel ad reconciliationem integram
progredi possimus vel ad talem invicem consuetu-
dinem ex qua temporis progressu arctior quedam
unitas nascatur.

Sententia XI1I.—Conventus suadet, immo magni
momenti esse censet ad reconciliationem confirman-
dam, ut notitia late diffundatur de doctrine normis
et de formulis in Ecclesia Anglicana usitatis ; suadet
etiam ut simili modo divulgetur notitia de formulis
doctrine cultusque divini et regiminis a ceteris
Christianorum societatibus receptis, in quas gentes
Anglicizantes divisz sunt.]

Anglicana autem Communio, ut videtur, societates
hominum a se per miseras divisiones separatas hoc
animo respicit :—

Parati sumus ad fraterna colloquia omnes recipere
qui communionem nobiscum perfectiorem expetant.

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 387

Condiciones autem ferimus quibus ex sententia et
persuasione nostra talis communio iniri_possit.
Quamquam enim vehementissime cupimus fratres a
nobis aversos complecti, ut voluntas Domini “unus
grex unus pastor” ad effectum perducatur, non
tamen decet nos infideles esse dispensatores magni
depositi nobis commendati... Neque enim circa fidem
neque circa disciplinam loco nostro cedere possumus.
Concordia autem illa, neque vera fieri possit iudicio
nostro neque optanda quz statione sic relicta fuerit
composita.

Libentissime tamen et cum gratiarum actione
agnoscimus verum pietatis opus quod a Christianis
extra Communionem nostram perficitur. Manifesta
enim et in oculis posita est gratia Dei laboribus
eorum propter Christi. nomen susceptis impertita.
Ne quis autem verba nostra aliter accipiat ac dicta
sunt. Immo probe compertum habemus quibus
vinculis et quam forti persuasione institutis propriis
adstricti sint ii qui a nobis dissident. Horum
ergo rationem habemus, itidemque institutorum
nostrorum et opinionum ab illis rationem haberi
volumus. Verum enimvero affirmant testes idonei
non in Anglia tantum sed in omnibus Christianismi
regionibus desiderium unitatis verum exstare, homi-
numque corda maius quam antea factum est ad
societatem inter Christianos conciliandam commoveri.
Hac voluntate penitus se affectum fuisse et in dis-
ceptationibus et in sententiis ostendit noster Conven-
tus. Faxit igitur Deus ut super aquas turbulentas
discordiarum religiosarum moveatur spiritus amoris.

De Ecclesits Scandinavicts.

Inter gentes que populos Anglicizantes proxime
contingunt Scandinavice certe numerantur, que et in
multis dicecesibus nostris frequentia satis magna
valent. Non mediocris ergo momenti Conventui
nostro fuit qualem se habere deberet Communio
Anglicana ergo ecclesias Scandinavicas. Suademus

388 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

autem in presens et familiarius versandum et mutuam
invicem cognitionem appetendam usque dum, occa-
sione oblata, arctiorem societatem ineamus nulla
tamen institutorum nostrorum, que necessaria cre-
dimus, iactura facta.

[Sententia X1V.—Conventui placuit amicitiam
inter ecclesias Scandinavicas et Anglicanas sedulo
expetendam ; et condiciones, si que proponantur, ab
ecclesia Suedica, ad mutuam difficultatum explica-
tionem spectantes, libentissime accipiendas, ut si
fieri possit, temporis progressu, communio invicem
stabiliatur, solido iuris ecclesiastici fundamento
confirmata. |

De veteribus Catholicis et aliis.

Neque vero qui nobiscum consociantur caritate et
benevolo affectu moveri non possunt erga illos qui in
Europa continenti ad Reformationem Ecclesiz con-
tendunt, presertim cum difficultatibus maximis
impediti eandem plerumque nobiscum rationem
secuti sint et Episcopatum quasi institutum Apos-
tolicum obtinuerint. Quamvis enim nondum venisse |
tempus censeamus ut cum ullis de illorum numero
societatem omnibus numeris absolutam ineamus, et
cum festinatam quamvis actionem valde deprecemur,
quz antiqua et bene cognita iurisdictionis instituta
violaverit, credimus tamen nullo iuris ecclesiastici
damno posse nos amicitize dextras prztendere, et
speramus insuper tempore opportuno fore ut liceat
cum nonnullis certe illorum arctiore nosmet societate
coniungere.

[ Sententia XV.—(A). Libentissime agnoscit Con-
ventus quam digne et libere se gesserit Ecclesia
Batava veterum Catholicorum, et crebriore fraterne
amicitiz usu sperandum censet ut multa ex im-
pedimentis, quz nunc nos ab invicem dirimant, de
medio fiant.

(B). Nostrum esse censemus et cum veterum
Catholicorum Communione in Germania et cum

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 5380

“Ecclesia Christiana Catholica” in Helvetia amici-
ti usum augere et promovere, non solum propter
studiorum coniunctionem sed etiam ut Deo gratias
referamus qui, in magnis difficultatibus et angustiis et
temptationibus, roboraverit illos ut pro veritate pati
velint; et iura illis pollicemur que a Delegatione
proposita sunt, eis saltem condicionibus que in
Relatione significantur.

Relatio autem ista ita se habet :—“ Nihil obstare
“nobis videtur quominus et clericos eorum et fideles
“laicos ad sacram Communionem admittamus, eis-
“dem scilicet condicionibus quibus apud nos nostri
“admittantur ; agnoscimus simul et benevolentiam
“eorum qua iura spiritualia etiam nostris conces-
“ serint.

“Propter varietates autem legum matrimonialium
“infaustas, quas magni momenti estimamus, definien-
“dum est nobis a sacra Communione prohibendam
“esse quamvis personam, que matrimonium contra
“leges et canones Ecclesia Anglicane contraxerit.
“ Contra vero, ius zequum veteribus Catholicis red-
“ dentes, neminem nos posse admittere profitemur qui
“apud eos a sacra communione fuerit prohibendus.”

(Cc). Benevolentia nostra digna esse veterum
Catholicorum in Austria studium et voluntatem sibi
minime parcentium; speramus autem cum res eorum
ecclesiastica perfecte fuerit et solide constituta pleni-
orem cum eis societatem nosmet inituros.

(D). De Reformatoribus autem qui in Italia, Gallia,
Hispania et Lusitania, iugum condicionum iniquarum
circa communionem ecclesiasticam excutere conni-
tantur, speramus fore ut, cum formulas doctrine et
disciplinee salubres assecuti sint et rem suam more
Catholico constituerint a nobis liberius agnoscantur.

(E) Nolumus sane intercedere quominus episcopi
ecclesiz Catholicz, ultima necessitate cogente, in
rebus ecclesiasticis peregre se interponant; depre-
camur tamen quamvis actionem que aut antiqua

390 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

et bene cognita iurisdictionis instituta aut commoda
totius Anglicane communionis videatur negligere.]

De Ecclestis Ortentalibus.

Sedulo se velle significavit Conventus ut benevolam
consuetudinem, que nunc Ecclesias Orientales cum
Communione Anglicana coniungat, confirmare et
augere possit. Etenim hae Ecclesiz Christianorum
hominum animos per longum tempus sibi concili-
averunt. Multa iam saecula persecutionem passz
in locis multis et tenebrosis evangelice lucis vivam
flammam servaverunt. Quod si hic et illic lux illa
languescere aut hebescere videatur, propter hoc etiam
magis nos decet, tempore opportuno utentes, flammam
hanc fovere ac conservare. Neque metuendum est ut
fraterna officia nostra, benigna voluntate, ut par est,
oblata, ab illis digne excipiantur. Agnoscimus
autem cum gratiarum actione nulla inter nos et illos
exstare impedimenta, qualia nos a Latinorum com-
munione prohibeant, tum propter infallibilitatem
ecclesiz sollemniter confirmatam quasi in persona
summi Pontificis inherentem, tum propter dogma
immaculate conceptionis Beatz Virginis Mariz, et
alia dogmata Conciliorum Pontificalium auctoritate
Christianis imposita. Romana quidem ecclesia soro-
rem Orientalem inique semper tractavit, quippe quae
Episcopos suos antiquis Dicecesibus ingerat, et pro-
selytismum strenue et constanter agat. Merito igitur
haec indignatur Ecclesia Orientalis, ut iniuriam passa,
cum institutis Catholicis plane contraria sint; nos
autem Anglicanos cavere decet ne simili modo
peccemus.

Si quis vero inter Orientales lucem clariorem et
Spiritualis vita incrementum desideraverit, potest
sane in ecclesia in qua baptizatus fuerit permanendo,
lucem circa se aliquo modo diffundere, et civibus suis
opem afferre.

Sed cum a proselytismo certe nos ΤΈΡΕΣΞ

Latin Version of the Encyclical Letter. 391

debeamus, zequum tamen est iura nostra et statum
verum ecclesiz nostrz, per annorum seriem stabilite,
hominibus illis proponere, qui cum rebus novis
preecipue in religione maxime diffidant, historiam
tamen Catholic antiquitatis magni faciant. Oportet
etiam nos institutioni Clericorum in Orientis partibus
subvenire, et ubi rerum angustia sit etiam scholis
communibus succurrere.

[ Sententza XVII. Conventus noster consuetudine
benevola lztatur qua usi sunt Archiepiscopi Cantuar-
ienses aliique ex Episcopis Anglicanis cum Patriarchis
Constantinopoleos aliisque Patriarchis vel Episcopis
Orientalibus, et sperare se profitetur fore ut progressu
temporis impedimenta que pleniorem communionem
iam prohibeant, usu familiari crescente, et diffusa
luce, e medio tollantur. Fideles autem ad orationes
de hac re constanter excitat Conventus, suadet
que eis qui Christi leges nobiscum sequuntur ut
Reformationi intestine ecclesiarum Orientalium
consilio et ope subveniant, potius quam singulos hinc
et illinc a Communione illarum subtrahant. |

De formulis canonicis apud nos usitaiis.

His animadversis formulas doctrine et cultus
divini canonicas, que apud nos receptz sunt, diligen-
tius a vobis perpendi volumus. Maximi enim
momenti est et fidem nostram et mores, cum ecclesiis
antiquis tum eis que per gentes a missionariis iam
formantur et aluntur, tales ostendi ut neque ullis
fastidio sint neque libertatem veram impediant,
neque plenze perfecteque Communioni moram
afferant.

Declaramus igitur, priorum Conventuum exemplum
secuti, nos sub uno Capite divino in unius Catholice
et Apostolicze Ecclesiz Societate coniungi, unamque
-Fidem firmiter tenere in scripturis sacris revelatam, ἡ
symbolis definitam, a primitiva ecclesia constanter
conservatam et a Conciliis cecumenicis indubitatis
affirmatam: agnoscimus autem doctrine simul et

392 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

cultus divini formulas proprias Librum Precum pub-
licarum cum Catechismo, formam Ordinationis, et
triginta novem Articulos—hereditatem quidem pre-
cipuam Ecclesize Anglice, sed plus minusve ab
omnibus nostre Communionis Ecclesiis receptam.

Formulas autem istas externis Ecclesiis integras
et sinceras ostendi volumus. Quippe libertas quo-
dammodo ecclesiis per gentes paganas succrescen-
tibus concedenda est; neque enim zquum foret triginta
novem Articulos integros his imponi pro condicione
nobiscum communicandi utpote et verbis et forma
rerum temporumque indole et colore circa originem
primam affectos. Contra autem non possumus illas
ut pleno iure nobiscum communicantes et preesertim
quoad Ordines sacros agnoscere, nisi prius testi-
monium satis idoneum dederint se eandem, quoad
substantiam eius,doctrine formam nobiscum obtinere.
Nec difficile esse putandum, nedum impossibile,
articulos cum formulis nostris doctrine et cultus divini
satis concordantes proponere, qui omnibus in ecclesia
tali ordinandis imponendi sint.

[ Seztentia XVIII—Ab Archiepiscopo Cantuar-
iensi expetit Conventus ut consilium cum quibus
voluerit capiat, qui deliberent utrum expediat inter-
pretationem Anglicam Symboli Niczni vel formule
“ Quicunque vult.” quovis modo emendare.

Sententia X1X.—De Ecclesiis modo nunc consti-
tutis, preesertim in regionibus nondum Christianis, ita
iudicamus. Priusquam recognoscantur ut que pleno
iure communionis nobiscum frui debeant, et preecipue
quze donum successionis Episcopalis a nobis accipere
debeant, oportet eos nobis documentis certis ostendere
se, eandem, quoad substantiam eius, doctrine formam
nobiscum obtinere, et clericos earum articulis, qui cum
formularum nostrarum doctrine et cultus divini diserte
conceptis sententiis concordent, subscribere; non
tamen ex necessitate tales clericos cogendos esse

Latin Versivn of the Encyclical Letter. 393

triginta et novem Articulos Religionis integros
accipere. |

Hanc epistolam, Fratres, ad finem perducimus
humiles et sinceras Deo Omnipotenti gratias agentes,
propter magnam Eius erga nos benevolentiam et
caritatem. -Concessit enim nobis ut hic plures numero
quam antea congregemur. Ex omni autem regione
orbis terrarum scientiz simul et experientiz thesauri
in medium collati sunt. Ipsis quoque oculis, plenius
quam antea fieri poterat, proposita est magnz
Anglicane Communionis et amplitudo et potentia et
virtus.

Quantis facultatibus predita sit, quantis temporum
opportunitatibus, quantis commodis fruatur intellex-
imus. In disceptationibus autem communi concilio
habitis unitatem eius veram esse experti sumus, quan-
tumvis partes eius vel statu vel maturitate varient.
Ubi enim discordia sententiarum inter nos fuerit, ibi
etiam concordia spiritus et propositi unitas; itaque
recordationibus quas nobiscum reportamus refecti
roboratique et ad maiora incitati ad diceceses nostras
alius alia via redibimus.

Sed beneficii a Deo accepti conscientia cum officii
debito arcte coniuncta est. Quo magis enim ea
commoda sentimus, quibus in communione Anglicana
fruimur, eo magis incendimur ut munera nostra
exsequamur, que non tantum nostrates tangant, vel
in evangelio propagando expleantur, sed ad omnes
ecclesias Dei pertineant. Quippe singulari loco positi
ad singulare opus evocamur. Deum ergo enixe
apprecamur ut omnes—clerici pariter ac laici—mani-
festam Eius voluntatem secum reputent, et quam-
cumque stationem teneant summis viribus contendant
ut propositum Eius in finem debitum perducatur.

His verbis, salutem vobis multam optantes,
ea que nobis in hoc Conventu placuerunt studio vestro
et considerationi tradimus, Deum insuper supplicantes
ut Spiritus Sanctus cogitationes vestras gubernet et

304 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

vosmet ipsos in omnem veritatem dirigat, faciatque ut
consilia nostra per operationes vestras ad gloriam
Dei vertantur et ad regni Christi incrementum.

Subscripsi in nomine Conventus,

EDWARDUS CANTUARIENSIS.

ἘΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ EKATON
ΤΕΣΣΑΡΑΚΟΝΤΑ ΠΕΝΤΕ
ἘΠΙΣΚΟΠΩΝ

ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ συνηθροισμένων ἐν Παλατίῳ Λαμ-
βηθανῷ μηνὶ ᾿Ιουλίῳ ἔτει awn’ (1888).

Τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ χαίρειν ἐν Κυρίῳ.

Ἡμεῖς ᾿Αρχιεπίσκοποι καὶ ᾿Μητροπολῖται καὶ ἄλλοι ἐπί-
σκοποι τῆς ἁγίας Καθολικῆς Ἐκκλησίας, «“υγκοινωνοῦντες
ὁλοκλήρως τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ ᾿Εκκλησίᾳ, ἑκατὸν “τεσσαρά-
κοντα πέντε ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμόν, ἅπαντες ἐπισκοπὴν
παροικιῶν ἐπιτηδεύοντες ἢ νομίμως ἐπισκοπικὰ τέλη ἐν
αὐταῖς ἐπιτετραμμένοι, συνελθόντες ἐκ διαφόρων τῆς
οἰκουμένης κλιμάτων ἐν Παλατίῳ Λαμβηθανῷ ἔ ἔτει σωτη-
ρίῳ AON, (1888), προεδρεύοντος τοῦ σεβασμιωτάτου
᾿Εδουάρδου τῇ θείᾳ προνοίᾳ ᾿Αρχιεπισκόπου Καντουα-
ρίας, ὅλης ᾿Αγγλίας πρωτεύοντος, καὶ Μητροπολίτου,
μετειληφότες ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ εἰρημένου Παλατίου τῶν
ἁγίων μυστηρίων τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ
Κυρίου, καὶ προσευχαῖς ἡνωμένοι ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ ἁγίου
Πνεύματος χειραγωγίας, ἐξέτασιν πεποιήκαμεν διαφόρων
ζητημάτων ἡ ἡμῖν προβεβλημένων ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν τοῦ
Θεοῦ λαοῦ εὐπραγίαν καὶ τὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας κατάστασιν
ἐν διαφόροις τοῦ κόσμου μέρεσιν.

Περὲ τούτων οὖν ἀκριβῶς καὶ σπουδαίως ὅλον μῆνα
συμβουλευσάμενοι, κοινῇ τε συνόδῳ καὶ ἰδίᾳ οἷς τὰ
πράγματα ; κατὰ μέρος ἐπετράπη, παρατιθέμεθα τανῦν τοῖς
πιστοῖς τὰ περὶ τούτων ἡμῖν δόξαντα.

5, δ 8

206 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Ταύτῃ τῇ ἐπιστολῇ δύο εἴδη ὑπομνημάτων προστε-
θείκαμεν, δηλαδὴ τὰς τοῦ Συμβουλίου διατάξεις καὶ τὰς
τῶν ᾿Ἐπιτροπῶν ἐκθέσεις. Ἐ

Γνωρίζειν δὲ ὑμᾶς θέλομεν ὅτι τὰ πρῶτα μόνον θεωρεῖν
χρεὼν ὡς UT αὐτοῦ τοῦ Συμβουλίου ἀποπεφασμένα.
Αἱ γὰρ ἐκθέσεις ἐπὶ τοσοῦτον τὸ τοῦ Συμβουλίου
φρόνημα ὑποδεικνύασιν ὅσονπερ ἐν ταῖς διατάξεσιν ἢ
κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν ἢ αὐτοῖς ῥήμασιν ἀνελήφθησαν. Τὰς
δὲ ἐκθέσεις ἐκείνας τετυπωμένας ἐκδιδόναι ἄξιον ἡγού-
μεθα, ὡς τοῖς ἀναγιγνώσκουσιν καρπὸν μελέτης ἱκανὸν
παραστήσειν δυναμένας.

Πρῶτον δὴ τὰ ἠθικὰ καὶ πρακτικὰ ἐτάξαμεν περὶ ὧν
ἐν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ λόγος ἐγένετο᾽ καὶ πρώτιστα τὰ τῆς
᾿Εκκλησίας καθήκοντα ὑπὲρ τῆς ἐγκρατείας καὶ τῆς
ἁγνείας.

ἈΝ A 4 A A ἧς τον ,
Περὶ τῆς περὶ τὰ μεθυστικὰ ποτὰ ἐγκρατειας.

Εὐὐγενῶς ἐκ πολλῶν ἐτῶν ἤδη, καὶ ἐν τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ καὶ
ἐκτὸς, ἠγωνίσαντο ἄνδρες αὐταπαρνητικοὶ ὅπως τὴν περὶ
τὰ ποτὰ ἀκρασίαν καταργήσωσιν, τοῖς δὲ ἐπιχειρήμασιν
τούτοις ἐπίδοσιν πολλαπλασίαν μετὰ σπουδῆς εὐχόμεθα.
Περὶ γὰρ τῶν κακῶν τῶν καὶ τῇ Ἐκκλησίᾳ καὶ τῷ
ἡμετέρῳ ἔθνει ἐκ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ταύτης συμβαινόντων
ὑπερβολικῶς εἰπεῖν οὐ ῥάδιον᾽ ἀλλὰ ἀναγκαῖον ἡγούμεθα
περὶ ψευδοῦς τινος ὑποθέσεως νουθετικώτερον λέγειν ἵνα
μὴ τὰ καλῶς εἰργασμένα παρεισδύουσα διαφθείρῃ. Τὴν
μὲν γὰρ παντελῆ λεγομένην ἀποχὴν τῶν μεθυστικῶν
ποτῶν περὶ πολλοῦ ποιούμεθα ὡς ἐπὶ τέλει ἀγαθῷ
ἐπιτηδευομένην" τοὺς δὲ λόγους ἐκείνους ἀποδοκιμάξομεν
οἷς ἡ τοῦ οἴνου χρῆσις καθ᾽ αὑτὴν καταγινώσκεται, χωρὶς
τῶν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς ἢ τοῖς χρωμένοις ἢ καὶ ἑτέροις συμβαινόν-
Tov’ τὴν δὲ πρᾶξιν τινῶν, ὡς λέγεται, ἐπεμεμψάμεθα ἐκ
τῆς ὑποθέσεως ταύτης σιγῇ ὑποκειμένης ὡς φαίνεται

* Ἔν ταύτῃ τῇ μεταφράσει τὰς τοῦ Συμβουλίου διατάξεις ὅσον
χρέος ἦν τοῖς τῆς ἐπιστολῆς οἰκείοις τόποις παρατεθείκαμεν, τῶν δὲ
ἐκθέσεων αὐτὰ τἀναγκαιότατα μόνον δεδώκαμεν πρὸς τὴν κατάληψιν
τῶν δεδογμένων.

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 307

ἐκγινομένην, οἵτινες ἑτέρῳ τινὶ ποτῷ ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις
μυστηρίοις χρῶνται.

[Διάταξις β΄. Οἱ ἐν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ συναθροισθέντες
ἐπίσκοποι ἀποφαίνομεν τὴν χρῆσιν τοῦ ἐκ : βοτρύων
ἀξζυμώτου χυμοῦ ἢ ἄλλου τινὸς πλὴν οἴνου ἀλη-
θινοῦ κραθέντος ὕδατι ἢ ἢ ἀκράτου, ἐν τῇ μεταδόσει
τοῦ ποτηρίου ἐν τῇ ἁγίᾳ κοινωνίᾳ, μὴ εἶναι κατὰ
τὸ ὑπόδειγμα τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ ἔκκλισιν εἶναι
ἰδιογνώμονα τοῦ τῆς καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας ἔθους.]

Περὶ ἁγνείας.

Περὶ τῆς ἁγνείας μέντοι νῦν δὴ πρῶτον ἄρχεται κινεῖσ-
θαι εἰ εἰς τὸ ὃ δραστήριον ἡ ἡ τοῦ Χριστιανοῦ πλήθους συνείδησις"
ἡμεῖς οὖν τῷ καιρῷ τῷδε χρῆσθαι θέλομεν, ἐν ᾧ ἐκ
μακροτάτων κλιμάτων πρόβουλοι τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινω-
νίας συνηθροίσθησαν, ὅπως κατ᾽ ἐκείνης τῆς ἁμαρτίας
ἱερὸν πόλεμον ἀνακηρύσσωμεν, ἣ πρὸ πασῶν τὸ τοῦ
Χριστοῦ σῶμα μιαίνει καὶ τὸν ναὸν τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος
κοινοῖ. ᾿Ανακαλούμεθα οὖν τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει λόγους
τοὺς ἐμβριθεῖς" οὐδενὸς γὰρ ἄλλου ἢ κοινῆς πάντων
Χριστιανῶν ἐ ἐνεργείας δεῖ ὅ ὅπως τὸ κακὸν τοῦτο παύσωμεν"
ἐπικαλούμεθα δὲ ὑμᾶς συμμάχους “ἀσκήσεως καθαρᾶς καὶ
μεγαλοθύμου" ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα δὲ ἅ ἅπαντας πρὸς οὕστινας
ἂν ἡ φωνὴ ἡμῶν ἐφίκηται ἵνα ἡμῖν συναντιλαμβάνωνται
πρὸς τὴν τῆς δημοσίας γνώμης κάθαρσιν, καὶ πρὸς τὴν τῶν
ἀγεννῶν καὶ σαπρῶν παραδοσέων παντελῆ κατάλυσιν,
τῶν μὴ μόνον τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ δεσπότου ἡ ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ a ἀτιμα-
ζουσῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν φύσιν τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἐν εἰκόνι
Θεοῦ κτισθεῖσαν καταισχυνουσῶν.

[Ἢ ἔκθεσις τῆς ᾿Επιτροπῆς πᾶσιν τοῖς ᾿Επισκόποις
ἤρεσεν, καὶ ὡς πλείστης σπουδῆς ἀξία ἐπῃνέθη.]

Ν , ε ’
Περι γάμου οσιότητος.

᾿Αμέσως δὲ τούτου τοῦ λόγου ἔχεται, ἡ τῆς τοῦ γάμου
ὁσιότητος διαφύλαξις, ἀφ᾽ ἧς πᾶσα ἡ δημοσία ἀρετὴ

208 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

ἀπήρτηται. Αὕτη δὲ ζημίαν ἔλαβεν οὐ τὴν τυχοῦσαν
ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρτίως ἐν χώραις τισὶν νενομοθετημένων, καθ᾽
ἃ ἡ τοῦ γάμου διάλυσις ἐ ἐπὶ πλείοσιν αἰτίαις ἢ τὸ πρότερον
συγχωρεῖται. Τὴν οὖν περὶ τούτων Χριστοῦ ἐπιταγὴν
πάλιν ἀνακηρύσσειν ἀναγκαῖον ἡμῖν ἡγησάμεθα καὶ τοῖς
κληρικοῖς τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας παραγγελίας τινὰς ὑπο-
θέσθαι ποίους δεῖ παρέχεσθαι ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς τὰς τοῦ
Κυριακοῦ κανόνος παραβάσεις.

[Διάταξις δ΄, (Α.) Τοῦ Κυρίου ῥητῶς τὴν τοῦ γάμου
διάλυσιν κωλύοντος παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας ἢ
ἀφο γον οὐκ ἐξ ἄλλης αἰτίας χωρὶς τῆς ἐξηρημένης

ἰαξύγιον ἀποδέχεσθαι δύναται ἡ Χριστιανὴ
ἐκκλησία, ἢ ὁτῳοῦν τρόπῳ τῷ παρὰ τὸν νόμον
τοῦτον διαξυγέντι γάμον συναινεῖν, ζῶντος τοῦ
ἑτέρου T οσώπου.

(8. Papou διὰ πορνείαν ἢ μουχείαν διαλυθέντος οὐδαμῶς
δεῖ τὸ πρόσωπον τὸ τῆς αἰτίας ἔνοχον. εἰς μετά-
An εὐλογίας ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἐφ᾽ ἑτέρῳ γάμῳ
ἀξιοῦσθαι, ζῶντος τοῦ ἀναιτίου.

(Γ.) ᾿Επειδήπερ οἴδαμεν διημφισβητῆσθαι πολλάκις
ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ; γάμου διὰ μοιχείαν διαλυθέντος,
πότερον ἐβούλετο ὁ ὁ Κύριος τῷ ἀναιτίῳ προσώπῳ
γάμον ἀπαγορεύειν ἢ μὴ, παραινεῖ τὸ Συμβούλιον
τοῖς κληρικοῖς παραγγελίας μὴ διδόναι ὅπως τῶν
ἁγίων μυστηρίων καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τῆς ἐκκλησίας
προνομίων τοὺς τοιούτους κωλύωσιν, νόμῳ πόλεως
γεγαμηκότας.

Περὶ πολυγαμίας.

Ἢ τοῦ γάμου ὁσιότης ὡς ἐν Χριστιανοῖς νενομισμένου
ἐν συζυγίᾳ πιστῇ ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς πρὸς μίαν γυναῖκα κεῖται,
ἕως ἂν τῷ θανάτῳ ἡ συζυγία διαλυθῇῆ. Αἱ μὲν οὖν
τῶν ἐθνικῶν πολυγαμικαὶ συνάφειαι ὁμολογουμένως τῷ
νόμῳ Χριστοῦ κατεγνωσμέναι elo iv’ ἀπορίας δὲ πολλὰς
ἔργῳ παριστᾶσιν, ὧν ἐν τῷ _ πρόσθεν χρόνῳ διάφοροι
λύσεις γεγένηνται. Ἡμεῖς μέντοι τὴν πολυγαμίαν σκε-

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 399

ψάμενοι πρὸς τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν ἱεραποστόλων ἐκ διαφόρων
μερῶν τῆς γῆς ἀπαγγελθέντα, τῶν μὲν μικροτέρων ἀπέ-
χέσθαι ἠξιώσαμεν τοῖς κατὰ τόπους προεστῶσιν τῶν
ἐκκλησιῶν ἐπιτρέψαντες, τὰ δὲ καθόλου ὁρίσαντες τοιαῦτα
παρηγγείλαμεν οἷς ἀνάγκην εἶναι νομίζομεν ἐπακολουθεῖν
τὸν ἱεραπόστολον, τὸν ἀσφαλῶς ἐνεργεῖν βουλόμενον.
IIp@rov δὲ πάντων τούτου ἐφροντίσαμεν τοῦ τὴν Χρισ-
τιανικὴν τοῦ γάμου ὑπόληψιν τηρεῖν καὶ διαφυλάττειν,
νομίσαντες τὰς παραυτίκα καὶ ἐν τάχει ἐπιτυχίας, al
ἴσως ἂν πρὸς τὴν διάδοσιν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἐπεγένοντο, ἐν
μηδενὶ λόγῳ εἶναι διαφθαρείσης καὶ συγχυθείσης τῆς
ὑπολήψεως ταύτης.

[Διάταξις ε΄. (A.) Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τοὺς ἐν
πολυγαμίᾳ διαιτωμένους μὴ πρὸς τὸ βάπτισμα
παρίεσθαι, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς κατηχουμένους καταλέγεσθαι
καὶ τῇ Χριστιανικῇ διδαχῇ ὑποτάσσεσθαι, ἕως ἂν
οὕτω καταστῶσιν ὥστε τὸν νόμον Χριστοῦ παρα-
δέχεσθαι.

(Β.) Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τὰς τῶν πολυγάμων γυναῖκας
ἐνίοτε πρὸς τὸ βάπτισμα παριέναι ἐνδέχεσθαι,
τοὺς δὲ κατὰ τόπους προεστῶτας τῆς ἐκκλησίας
διαγιγνώσκειν τὰς περιστάσεις ἐν αἷς τὰς τοιαύτας
βαπτίζειν ἔξεσται.]

Περὶ τῆς κυριακῆς ἡμέρας.

Ἢ τῆς κυριακῆς παρατήρησις, ὡς ἡμέρας ἀναπαύσεως
καὶ θρησκείας καὶ εὐαγγελικῆς διδασκαλίας, τείνει παρευθὺς
πρὸς τὴν τῆς Χριστιανικῆς πολιτείας εὐταξίαν. Kare-
νοήσαμεν δὲ προσφάτως τῆς. ἀμελείας προκοπτούσης
ἀνειμενέστερον τηρεῖσθαι τὴν ἡμέραν, ὥστε κινδυνεύειν
τὴν ἁγιότητα αὐτῆς ἐλαττωθήσεσθαι. Τοῦτο δὲ μάλιστα
πάντων ἀπευχόμενοι τοὺς σχολῇ πολλῇ χρωμένους
ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα μὴ διὰ φιλαυτίας ἀναπαύσεως καιροὺς
καὶ θρησκείας ἑτέροις ὑφαιρεῖν. Τοὺς δὲ δεσπότας
ἐπιμαρτυρόμεθα καὶ τοὺς ἐργοδότας τὰ τῶν ὑπηρετῶν καὶ
ἐργατῶν δίκαια φιλοτίμως φυλάττειν. ἸΚληρονομίαν γὰρ
ἔχομεν παντιμοτάτην τὴν Κυριακὴν ἡμέραν, ὅστις δὲ
ταυτῇ καταχρῆται δεινῆς κρίσεως ὑπεύθυνος γίγνεται.

400 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

[Διάταξις ζ΄. (A.) Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τὴν θρησκευ-
τικὴν παρατήρησιν μιᾶς ἡμέρας ἐν ταῖς ἑπτά, ἐν
τῇ τετάρτῃ ἐντολῇ διαταχθεῖσαν, θεῖον ἔχειν τὸ
κῦρος.

(Β.) ᾿Απὸ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τοῦ Κυρίου τὴν πρώτην τῆς
ἑβδομάδος τετηρῆσθαι Χριστιανοῖς ὡς ἡμέραν
θρησκείας καὶ ἀναπαύσεως, καὶ κυριακὴν ἐπονο-
μασθεῖσαν τὴν ἱερὰν τάξιν τοῦ σαββάτου ἤρεμα
διαδέξασθαι ὡς μεγάλην ἑορτὴν κατὰ πᾶσαν
ἑβδομάδα τῇ Χριστιανῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ.

(Γ.) Τὴν παρατήρησιν τῆς κυριακῆς, ὡς ἡμέρας ἀνα-
παύσεως καὶ θρησκείας καὶ θείας διδασκαλίας,
παντιμότατον ἀγαθὸν γεγονέναι πάσαις Χρισ-
τιανικαῖς χωραῖς ἐν αἷς διεφυλάχθη.

(4.) Τὴν καθ᾽’ ἡμέραν αὐξανομένην ἀμέλειαν τῆς
παρατηρήσεως κινδυνεύειν μέγα τι ὑφαιρήσειν
τοῦ ἱεροῦ αὐτῆς καὶ φιλανθρώπου χαρακτῆρος.

(E.) ᾿Απευκτέον εἶναι τὰ μάλιστα τὴν συνήθειάν τινων
τὴν ἐπεκτεινομένην, τῶν εὐπορίᾳ καὶ σχολῇ
πολλῇ χρωμένων, τὸ τὴν κυριακὴν εἰς τέρψεις
βιωτικὰς μεταστρέφειν.

(Z.) Φυλακτέον εἶναι ἵνα μηδὲν ὑφαιρῆται τῆς ἀναπαυ-

ο΄ σεῶς ἧς ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ οὐχ ἧττον οἱ ὑπηρέται
ἢ οἱ κύριοι, οὐδ᾽ ἧττον οἱ χειροτέχναν ἢ οἱ ἐργο-
δόται δίκαιοί εἰσιν borcudlae

Περὶ Tod κοινεταιρισμοῦ (Socialism).

Συνῳκείωται δὲ τοῖς πρακτικοῖς ξητήμασι τούτοις ἡ
σχέσις τῆς Χριστιανικῆς ἐκκλησίας πρὸς τὰ κοινο-
πολιτικὰ τὰ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ἀμφισβητούμενα. Τὸ γὰρ
περισσῶς ἄνισον τῆς διαδόσεως τῶν βιωτικῶν χρημάτων,
καὶ ἔνθεν μὲν ὁ ἀποθησαυρισμὸς ἄτοπος γεγενημένος, ἔνθεν
δὲ ἡ ἀθλιωτάτη πτωχεία---ταῦτα τῷ ἐν ἑαυτῷ τὸ φρόνημα
τοῦ Χριστοῦ κατέχοντι φροντίδα πολλὴν καὶ μέριμναν
παρέχει. Οὐδὲν ἄρα λόγου ἀξιώτερόν ἐστιν, οὔτε τοῖς
κληρικοῖς οὔτε τοῖς λαικοῖς, ἢ τὰ περὶ τοῦ λεγομένου
κοινεταιρισμοῦ προβεβλημένα. “H δὲ μελέτη τῶν ἐπι-

Greek Verston of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 401

χειρημάτων τῶν πρὸς τὸ ἰσόρροπον τεινόντων περὶ τὰ
ἐκτὸς ἀγαθά, καὶ ἡ μετὰ χαρᾶς ἀποδοχὴ τῶν καλῶς τισιν
ἢ ἐπινοουμένων ἢ πραττομένων, καὶ τὸ βουλεύεσθαι ὅπως
εἴτε νομοθεσίᾳ εἴτε ἑταιρείᾳ εἴτε ἄλλῳ τινὶ τρόπῳ εἰρηνικῶς
καὶ ἄνευ στάσεως καὶ ἀδικίας αἱ ἀπορίαι αὗται λύσεως
τύχωσιν---ταῦτα ἐν τοῖς γενναιοτάτοις ἀριθμοῦμεν οἷς οἱ
τοῖς ἴχνεσιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπακολουθεῖν βουλόμενοι
ἑαυτοὺς παραδιδόναι δύνανται. "ἔστιν δὲ ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει
; πρὸς τὴν λύσιν τῶν προβλημάτων τούτων ἂν συμ-
ἀλλοι.

Περὶ τῶν μεταναστάντων.

Εἰσὶν δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐξαιρέτως τῆς φροντίδος τοῦ συμβου-
λίου καὶ συμπαθείας ἐνδικώτατα ἠξιώθησαν. Διὰ γὰρ
τῶν μεταναστάντων ἡ τῶν Βρεττανικῶν νήσων ἐκκλησία
τῇ τῶν .Ομοσπόνδων ἸΠολιτειῶν καὶ ταῖς τῶν ἀποικιῶν
ἐκκλησίαις κοινωνικῷ συνδέσμῳ δέδεται. Οὐδὲν ἄρα
οἰκειότερον τῷ ἡμετέρῳ συλλόγῳ ἢ τὸ ἐπισκέπτεσθαι τί
τὸ ὀφειλόμενον τοῖς πολλοῖς τούτοις τοῖς ὁμότιμον ἡμῖν
πίστιν κεκτημένοις. ἹΠροσήκει δὲ μάλιστα τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ
κατὰ πᾶσαν τὴν πορείαν ἐκ τῆς ἀρχαίας πατρίδος εἰς
τὴν νέαν συμπαθέστατα τούτους ἐπισκοπεῖν καὶ μετὰ
φροντίδος πολλῆς τηρεῖν, καὶ τοὺς κινδύνους τοὺς περὶ
τὴν ὁδὸν καὶ τῇ ψυχῇ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι ἐγκειμένους
ἀποτρέπειν. Ἔν δὲ τῇ ἐκθέσει τινὰ ὑποτεθείκαμεν τὰ
πρὸς τὸ τέλος τοῦτο ὡς πιστεύομεν συμβαλούμενα.

Περὶ διδασκαλίας καὶ κατηχήσεως.

Διατάξαντες οὖν οὕτως περὶ τούτων, ὥστε ταῖς ἐπιτα-
γαῖς τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ τῇ εὐωγγελικῇ εὐταξίᾳ καὶ κατὰ τὸν
βίον καὶ ἐν τῇ πολιτείᾳ τὸν πρῶτον τόπον ἀποδοῦναι,
ἐκεῖνα ἤδη ἐπισκεψώμεθα ἃ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἕτοιμα καὶ
πρόσκαιρά ἐστιν εἰς τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀρχῶν τῆς
πίστεως αἷς πᾶσα ἡ ἠθικὴ διδασκαλία ἐπῳωκοδόμηται.

Πεπείσμεθα δὲ ἀνενδοιάστως τὸ ἔργον τοῦτο μελέτης
ἀκριβοῦς δεῖσθαι καὶ ἐπιδόσεως μεγάλης. “H yap θρη-

402 Lambeth Conference .of 1888.

σκευτικὴ προπαιδεία τῶν νεωτέρων ἐντελείας Kal γνησιό-
τητος πολὺ ἐλλείπει, οὐχ ἥκιστα δὲ περὶ τὴν θείαν διδαχήν.
Ἢ δὲ ἔλλειψις αὕτη οὐχ ἑνὶ μόνον γένει ἀνθρώπων πρόσ-
εστιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς λαικοὺς ἑτοιμάσασθαι δεῖ ὡς συλλη-
ψΨομένους τοῖς κληρικοῖς πρὸς τὴν χρείαν ταύτην. 'Τοῖς
μὲν οὖν γονεῦσιν παρὰ θεοῦ τοῦτο ἐπέσταλται" τοῖς δὲ
ἀναδόχοις παραγγέλλειν χρὴ 'ὅπως τοῖς παιδίοις ἀνθ᾽ ὧν
τῷ Χριστῷ συνετάξαντο τὴν πρέπουσαν ἐπιμέλειαν παρέ-
χωσιν, ἵνα μὴ ἀδίδακτοι μένωσιν, ἢ πρὸς τὴν σφραγῖδα
τῆς βεβαιώσεως ἀπαράσκευοι χωρῶσιν. ἸΠολλὴν δὲ
ἐπίδοσιν ἐπιδέχοιτ᾽ ἂν ἡ φανερῶς γιγνομένη κατήχησις
καὶ ἡ ἑτοιμασία τῶν πρὸς τὴν βεβαίωσιν τασσομένων.
“Awa δὲ καὶ συνεχεστέρας ἐπιστάσεως καὶ σπουδῆς ἐπι-
μελεστέρας παρὰ τῶν κληρικῶν προσδεῖται τὰ σχολεῖα
τὰ κυριακὰ τῆς νῦν πολλαχοῦ εὑρισκομένης. Tov δὲ ἐν
τοῖς τοιούτοις διδασκόντων καὶ τῶν-γεοφυτοδιδασκάλων
(pupil-teachers) ἐν τοῖς δημοτικοῖς σχολείοις (elementary
schools) τὴν παιδαγωγίαν οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ ἔργον ἀπαραίτητον
τῷ πρεσβυτέρῳ καὶ ποιμένι νομιστέον" τά τε ἠθικὰ καὶ
πρακτικὰ παραγγέλματα τὰ ἐκ τῶν Βιβλίων βεβαιοῦν
δεῖ τὸν διδάσκαλον τοὺς μαθητὰς ἀεὶ ἐπανακαχοῦντα ἐπὶ
τὰς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀπειλὰς καὶ τὰ μετ᾽ αὐτῶν διδαχῆς καὶ
εὐταξίας οἰκεῖα παραδείγματα ἐν ταῖς αὐταῖς γραφαῖς
περιλαμβανόμενα. ᾿ἊἘνδέχεται δὲ ἔτε πλέον τῆς νῦν
μεθόδου τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ὁμιλοῦντας τῇ πίστει ὁμοῦ
καὶ τῇ τῆς ἀρετῆς πράξει συμβάλλεσθαι, καὶ τοὺς
ἐξηγουμένους τὸ τῆς ἁγίας θρησκείας σύστημα καὶ τάξιν
προάγειν τοὺς συναγομένους ὅπως μανθάνωσιν ἀκριβῶς
οἵαις σχέσεσι᾽ πρὸς ᾿ἀλλήλας. χρῶνται ἡ εὐσέβεια καὶ ἡ
πίστις καὶ τὰ ἔργα---πτουτέστιν οἷα διδάσκουσιν ἥτε
βίβλος τῆς δημοσίας εὐχῆς καὶ ἡ κατήχησις καὶ τὰ
σύμβολα.

Οὐ μέντοι διὰ τοὺς νεωτέρους μόνον ἢ καὶ διὰ τοὺς
φανερῶς ἐν τοῖς ποιμνίοις αὐτῶν τεταγμένους ἀσφαλοῦς
καὶ ἀκριβοῦς διδαχῆς ἐφίεσθαι δεῖ τοὺς κληρικούς.

Ἢ γὰρ τῶν ἱερῶν γραφῶν μελέτη διανοητικῆς γυμνα-
σίας μέρος οὐ σμικρὸν τῷ Χριστιανῷ γέγονεν, τὰ δὲ
βιβλία πρῶτον πάντων ὄργανον πᾶσιν τοῖς τὴν εὐσέβειαν
ὑφηγουμένοις. ᾿Αλλ᾽ ἐν τῷ παρόντι, κατὰ δυστυχίαν,

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 403

πολλοὶ πολλαχόθεν ὡς ἐκ παρατάξεως τοῖς βιβλίοις
ἐπιστρατεύουσιν, οὐκ ἐῶντες ἀποδέχεσθαι αὐτὰ ὡς θείας
γνώσεως θησαυρόν, ἐπιπολάζουσι δὲ ἐν πάσῃ τάξει τῆς
πολιτείας ὑποψίαι πολλαὶ καὶ ἀπορίαι καὶ ἀντιλογίαν
καὶ κρίσεις ἀγνώμονες τῶν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει τῆς ἀληθείας
ἐπῳκοδομημένων δογμάτων.

᾿ς Ὅνταν μὲν οὖν τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐξ ἀπειρίας γίγνηται
τῆς καθηκούσης σχέσεως τῆς φυσικῆς ἐπιστήμης πρὸς
τὴν θείαν ἀποκάλυψιν, ἐνδέχεται δὴ καὶ εἰκός ἐστι μετὰ
πάσης εὐγνωμοσύνης κρίνειν καὶ ὑπομονητικῶς ἀνέχεσθαι.
"Hap δὲ καὶ ταραχθῶσιν αἱ ψυχαὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων διὰ τῶν
φυσικῶν εὑρημάτων ἢ ἐκ τῶν φυσιολόγων ἀποφάσεως,
φροντιστέον ὅπως μὴ τὰ σπέρματα τῆς πίστεως ἀποσβέ-
σομεν, μᾶλλον δὲ τοὺς οὕτως ταραχθέντας ἐπὶ τὸν
ἀληθινὸν λόγον προάξομεν, τουτέστιν ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν
εὑρημάτων δεικτέον δηλοῦσθαι νόμους οἵτινες, τοῖς ὀρθῶς
κρίνουσιν τὸ ἔργον τοῦ κτίστου καὶ δημιουργοῦ τὸ ἔνδοξον,
τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ φερόμενον, μετὰ τιμῆς
μείζονος διασαφοῦσιν.

Μείζονα δ᾽ ἔχει Κένδυνον ἡ παράταξις αὕτη, εἴτε σκεπτι-
κὴν δεῖ λέγειν εἴτε καὶ ἄντικρυς πολεμίαν, διὰ τὸ χαλεπῶς
ἂν διορίσαι ἡμᾶς μέχρι τίνος ἡ διδαχὴ ἡμῶν, ἢ τοὐλάχ-
ἐστον ἡ περὶ αὐτῆς τοῦ πλήθους ὑπόληψις, φαίνεσθαι
δύναται λόγον ἔχουσα ἀρκούντως τῶν περὶ θεοπνευστίας
καὶ περὶ τῆς ἐν τῇ παλαιᾷ διαθήκῃ προπαιδευτικῆς οἰκονο-
μίας ἐκ πολλοῦ καὶ πολλαχοῦ." ἐπιπολαζουσῶν δοξῶν, εἰ
καὶ μηδέποτε ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ κυρίως κεκανονισμένων.

ΠΠαραινετέον οὖν τοῖς KAnptxois ὅπως τὰ ἀμφισβητή-
ματα ταῦτα μετ᾽ εὐλαβείας καὶ φιλοπονίας μέταχειρίζωσιν,
καὶ σπουδαιότατα παρακλητέὸόν σύνδεσμον πάσης τῆς
διδαχῆς ποιεῖσθαι τὸν Κύριον ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν, ὡς
θυσίαν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, καὶ ἰατρὸν τῆς ἁμαρτω-
λίας, καὶ πηγὴν πάσης τῆς πνευματικῆς ζωῆς, καὶ ἀπο-
κάλυψιν τῇ συνειδήσει τῶν τε ὅρων καὶ τῆς προαιρέσεως
πάσης τῆς ἠθικῆς ἀρετῆς. Eis αὐτὸν γὰρ καὶ εἰς τὸ
ἔργον αὐτοῦ συντείνουσιν τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης αἱ διδαχαὶ
πᾶσαι, καὶ ἐξ αὐτοῦ αἱ τῆς καινῆς ῥέουσιν πᾶσαι καὶ
πνεύματι καὶ δυνάμει καὶ μορφῇ. Τῆς δὲ ἐκκλησίας τὸ
μὲν ἔργον ἐστὶν ἡ προσκομιδηὴ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις καὶ ἡ

404 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

> / ” U “ is

ἐξάπλωσις τῶν χαρισμάτων τῆς ἐνσαρκώσεως τοῦ Λόγου,

« \ es a A

ἡ δὲ διδαχὴ ἡ ἀνάπτυξις τῶν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ τῇ ἐνσαρκώσει
΄ > A

θεολογουμένων, ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς συμβόλοις εὑρίσκεται.

Περὶ τῶν πρὸς ἄλληλα σχέσεων τῶν μερῶν τῆς
᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας.

Ἔν τῇ ζητήσει περὶ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους σχέσιν τῶν
παροικιῶν καὶ μερῶν τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας ἔνια ἐφεύ-
ρομεν ἃ καὶ ὑμῖν ὡς ἀξιόλογα παρατιθέμεθα. ᾿Αναγκαῖον
μὲν πρῶτον φαίνεται ἐπὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς τὰς ὑπὸ τοῦ προτέρου
Συμβουλίου ἐν ἔτει awon’ (1878) καταβληθείσας ὑμᾶς
παραπέμπειν, καὶ κελεύειν τὰς τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας
ἐκκλησίας καὶ τοὺς ἐν αὐταῖς συναναστρεφομένους τὰς
κυρίως δηλωθείσας πράξεις ἢ παροικίας ἄλλης ἢ ἐπαρχίας
ἐν τιμῇ ἔχειν" ἐπίσκοπον δὲ μηδένα ἢ κληρικὸν ἐν
παροικίᾳ νομίμως κατασταθείσῃ, μὴ ἐπιτρέποντος τοῦ
ἐνταῦθα ἐπισκόπου, λειτουργεῖν. ἐπίσκοπον δὲ μηδένα
τοὺς ἐξ ἄλλης παροικίας ἐλθόντας κληρικοὺς ἄνευ συστα-
τικῶν ἐπιστολῶν, καὶ τοῦτο ἱκανῶν, εἰς λειτουργίαν
δέχεσθαι. “H yap τῶν TolovTwY κανόνων παραμέλησις
σκανδάλων χαλεπῶν αἰτία γέγονεν. Οἱ μὲν οὖν ἐπίσκο-
ποι τὰς τοιαύτας βλάβας προφυλάττεσθαι ἕτοιμοί εἰσιν
ἰδίᾳ τὴν συμβουλὴν διδόντες ἅμα τῷ εἰωθότι καὶ ὡρισμένῳ
συστατικῷ, τοὺς δὲ κληρικοὺς προσήκει εὐλαβείᾳ μείζονι
χρῆσθαι τὰς μαρτυρίας ὑποσημαινομένους" τοὺς δὲ τῶν
μαρτυριῶν δεομένους τοῦ μὴ λίαν εὐπαθεῖς εἰναι κατέχειν
ἑαυτούς, ἐὰν συμβαίνῃ αὐτοῖς περὶ τοῦ τίνες εἰσὶ καὶ
ποῖοι τὸ ἦθος ἐξετάζεσθαι" ἡ γὰρ τοιαύτη ἐξέτασις καίπερ
περισσὴ εἶναι δοκοῦσα πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς γιγνομένη, ἀναγκαία
ἐστὶν ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ ὅπως τῆς προσηκούσης ἀσφαλείας
τυγχάνωμεν.

Εὐλαβητέον δὲ μάλιστα περὶ τοὺς εἰς τὴν ἐν ταῖς
ἀποικίαις λειτουργίαν χειροτονηθέντας. ᾿Ασμενέστατα
μὲν γὰρ συγγιγνώσκομεν τοὺς τὴν τοῦ βίου ἀκμὴν εἰς τὴν
ἔξω διακονίαν προθύμως ἐπιδόντας μεγάλης σπουδῆς
ἀξίους εἶναι ὁπόταν δέη αὐτοὺς προελθόντος τοῦ χρόνου

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 405

ἀναπαύεσθαι ὡς ἐν TH πατρίδι ἢ THY οἴκοι ἐργασίαν τῆς
»Μ > 4 / \ \ 4, ς /
ἔξω ἀνταλλάττεσθαι. Καθόλου δὲ περὶ τούτων ὁρίζεσθαι
ἀδύνατον.
al a , e , a
Ἐκεῖνο δὲ ἡμῖν προτέθειται ὡς μεγίστης σπουδῆς ἄξιον
XN , 4 Ἁ A \ Ζ > “
- τὸ εἰ ἐνδέχεται Βουλὴν ἢ Βουλὰς καθιστάναι ἀναφορᾶς
ἕνεκα, ὥστε συμβουλεύειν περὶ τῶν ζητημάτων ἃ ἂν τύχῃ
προβεβλημένα ὑπὸ τῶν τὰς ἐπαρχίας τῆς ἐν ταῖς ἀποι-
κίαις ἐκκλησίας ἐπιτετραμμένων, ἢ καὶ διαγνῶναι. ἹΕερὶ
δὲ τούτου ἡμῖν δοκεῖ σκέψεως τε δεῖν πολλῆς καὶ βουλῆς
\ a 3 ΄
χρονίας, ὥστε μὴ τελευτῶντας ἀναγκάζεσθαι ἀρχὴν
καθιστάναι δι᾽ ἧς, εἴτε συμβουλευτικῆς γιγνομένης εἴτε
δικαστηρίῳ μᾶλλον ἐοικυίας, ἡ εὐκοσμία ἅμα καὶ ἡ
, ’

αὐτονομία κινδύνευοι ἂν βλαβήσεσθαι.

Ν “A a Ee , A a
Περὶ τῆς Tap ἡμιν συνενώσεως τῶν Χριστιανων.

Μετὰ φροντίδος καὶ μερίμνης συμβουλευομένοις ἔδοξεν
ἡμῖν ἀρκεῖν ὅρους τινὰς προκαταβαλέσθαι ὡς ἀφορμὴν
ἀφ᾽ ἧς, Θεοῦ συνεργοῦντος, ἐπὶ τὴν οἴκοι συνένωσιν
ἐγγυτέρω ἂν προχωροῖμεν. Οὗτοι δὲ οἱ ὅροι, τέτταρες
ὄντες τὸν ἀριθμὸν, ἐν ταῖς παρακειμέναις διατάξεσιν
εὑρεθήσονται.

[Διάταξις ια΄. Τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ἔδοξε τοὺς ὅρους τούσδε
ἀναδεῖξαι ὡς ἀφορμήν τινα παρέχοντας ἀφ᾽ ἧς,
Θεοῦ συνεργοῦντος, ἐπὶ τὴν οἴκοι συνένωσιν
ἐγγυτέρω ἂν προχωροῖμεν.

(A.) Τὰς ἁγίας γραφὰς τῆς παλαιᾶς καὶ τῆς καινῆς

ιαθήκης, τὰ πάντα εἰς σωτηρίαν ἀναγκαῖα κατε-
χούσας, καὶ κανόνα καὶ κυρίαν στάθμην τῆς
πίστεως ὑπάρχουσας.

(Β.) Τὸ σύμβολον τὸ ἀποστολικόν, ἐν βαπτίσματι
ἐκφωνούμενον, καὶ τὸ Νικαῖον, ἔκθεσιν τελείαν ὃν
τῆς Χριστιανικῆς πίστεως.

(Γ.) Τὰ δύο μυστήρια ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Χριστοῦ κεκα-
νονισμένα----τὸ Βάπτισμα καὶ τὸ ΚΚυριακὸν δεῖπνον
—pet ἀδιαλείπτου χρήσεως τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ
καταστάσει λόγων τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ τῶν ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ
ὡρισμένων στοιχείων διακονούμενα.

406 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

(4.) Tv ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων παραδεδομένην ᾿Ἐπισκοπὴν
ἐπιτηδείως οἰκονομουμένην ταῖς ἀεὶ κατὰ τόπους
χρείαις γυγνομέναις τῶν ἐθνῶν καὶ τῶν λαῶν τῶν
ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ καλουμένων εἰς τὴν ἑνότητα τῆς
ἐκκλησιας.

Διάταξις ιβ΄. Τὸ Συμβούλιον μετὰ σπουδῆς παρα-
καλεῖ τοὺς τὰ μέρη τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας νομίμως
ἐπιτετρωμμένους, συνεργοῦντας ἀλλήλοις ὅσον
δυνατόν, ἀποφαίνεσθαι ὡς ἕτοιμοι ὑπάρχουσιν
συμβουλῆς φιλαδέλφου μετέχειν (οἵανπερ ἤδη
ἀπεφήνατο ἡ ἐν ταῖς “Ομοσπόνδοις ἸΤΠολιτείαις
τῆς ᾿Αμερικῆς ἐκκλησία) μετὰ τῶν ἐπιτρόπων
ἄλλων Χριστιανικῶν κοινωνιῶν τῶν ἐν τοῖς
᾿Αγγλογλώσσοις ἔθνεσιν, ὅπως λογίξωνται τίνι
τρόπῳ ἐνδέχεται προχωρεῖν εἴτ᾽ ἐπὶ ὁλοσχερῆ
συνένωσιν, εἴτ᾽ ἐπὶ τοιαύτην τινὰ σχέσιν ἐξ ἧς ἂν
ῥᾷον ἢ εἰς ἑνότητα τελειοτέραν ἐν ὑστέρῳ χρόνῳ
προιέναι,

Διάταξις uy’. Td Συμβούλιον παραινεῖ ὡς λόγου
μάλιστα ἄξιον πρὸς τὴν συνένωσιν, τὸ γνωστοὺς
ποιεῖν ἅπασιν τοὺς κανόνας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τοὺς
τύπους τῆς λειτουργίας τοὺς ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ
ἐκκλησίᾳ νομιζομένους" ἔτι δὲ καὶ τοὐναντίον τοὺς
κανόνας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τῆς θρησκείας καὶ τῆς
πολιτείας τοὺς ἐν ἄλλαις κοινωνίαις τῶν Χρισ-
τιανῶν νομιζομένους, εἰς ἃς τὰ ᾿Αγγλόγλωσσα
ἔθνη κατατέτμηται.

Δοκεῖ δὲ ἡ τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας σχέσις πρὸς
τοὺς ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς διὰ τῶν ἀθλίων σχισμάτων διακεκριμένους
τοιάδε τις εἶναι"----

τοίμους ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς παρέχομεν πρὸς φιλάδελφον
συμβουλὴν μετὰ τῶν συγκοινωνίας τελειοτέρας μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν
μέχρι τινὸς γοῦν ὀρεγομένων. “Opovs δὲ προτίθεμεν ἐφ᾽
οἷς ἐνδέχεται καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν πεποίθησιν
τὴν τοιαύτην συγκοινωνίαν γίγνεσθαι. Ei γὰρ καὶ τὰ
μάλιστα ποθοῦμεν τοὺς ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν ἠλλοτριωμένους συμ-
περιλαμβάνειν, ὥστε εἰς ἔργον ἐλθεῖν τὸ τοῦ Κυρίου

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 407

“ μία ποίμνη, εἷς ποιμήν," οὐ μέντοι χρὴ ἡμᾶς οἰκονόμους
ἀπίστους γίγνεσθαι τῆς μεγάλης παρακαταθήκης τῆς
ἡμῖν παραδεδομένης. Οὔτε γὰρ περὶ τὴν πίστιν οὔτε
περὶ τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικὴν πολιτείαν τὴν τάξιν τὴν ἡμετέραν
ἀπολείπειν δυνάμεθα. Ἢ δὲ ὁμονοία ἐκείνη ἡ διὰ τοι-
αὐτης λιποταξίας ἐγγυγνομένη οὔτε ἀληθινὴ ἂν εἴη οὔτε
ἐπιπόθητος κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν γνώμην.

᾿Ασμένως μέντοι καὶ pet εὐχαριστίας ἀναγνωρίζομεν
τὸ ἔργον τῆς εὐσεβείας τὸ ἀληθινὸν τὸ ὑπὸ τῶν Χριστια-
νῶν τῶν ἔξω τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας φιλοπονούμενον.
Anrn γάρ ἐστιν καὶ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡ χάρις ἡ ταῖς ὑπὲρ τοῦ
Χριστοῦ ἐνεργείαις αὐτῶν συγχωρηθεῖσα. Τὸ δὲ περὶ
τούτων λεγόμενον οὐ παρανοητέον. Οὐ γὰρ περιορῶμεν
οἵοις συνδέσμοις καὶ ὡς σταθερᾷ τῇ πεποιθήσει δεδεμένοι
τῶν ἐπιτηδευμάτων τῶν εἰθισμένων ἔχονται. Ταῦτα δὲ ἐν
λόγῳ ἔχοντες καὶ τὰς ὑπολήψεις καὶ τὰς γνώμας τὰς
ἡμετέρας λόγου τυγχάνειν ἀξιοῦμεν. Μαρτυροῦσιν δὴ
ἄνδρες ἀξιόλογοι ὅτι οὐκ ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν
πᾶσιν μέρεσιν τῆς Χριστιανότητος πόθος ἀληθινὸς τῆς
ἑνότητος εὑρίσκεται, καὶ τὰ σπλάγχνα τῶν ἀνθρώπων
μᾶλλον ἢ τὸ πρὶν ὁμιλίας Χριστιανικῆς ὀρέγεται. Τὴν
δὲ συμπάθειαν ταύτην καὶ ἐν ταῖς ζητήσεσίν καὶ ἐν ταῖς
διατάξεσιν ἐν ἑαυτῷ πληρῶς ὑπάρχουσαν ἐνεδείξατο τὸ
Συμβούλιον" εὐχόμεθα δὲ πρὸ πάντων ὅπως τὸ πνεῦμα
τῆς ἀγάπης ἐπιφέρηται ἐπάνω τῶν θολερῶν ὑδάτων τῶν
θρησκευτικῶν διαλογισμῶν.

Ἢ πρὸς τὴν Σ᾽ κανδιναυικὴν ἐκκλησίαν σχέσις.

Ἔν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν οἷς ἐπιμίγνυνται μάλιστα οἱ 4 γγλό-
γλωσσοι ὑπάρχει δηλονότι τὰ Σ᾽ κανδιναυικὰ, καὶ γὰρ ἐν
πολλαῖς τῶν ἡμετέρων παροικιῶν τῷ πλήθει ὄχλον ἱκανὸν
συντελεῖ. Οὐκ ἀδιάφορον οὖν τῷ Συμβουλίῳ ποία ἂν
εἴη ἡ τῆς Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας σχέσις πρὸς τὰς Σ᾿ κανδι-
ναυικὰς ἐκκλησίας. Παρῃνέσαμεν δὲ ὅπως εἰς ἀκριβεσ-
τέραν γνῶσιν ἀλλήλων προέλθωμεν καὶ φιλικώτερον
συναναστρεφώμεθα μέχρις ἂν δυνώμεθα, συγχωρούντων

408 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

TOV πρωγμάτων, συμμαχίαν οἰκειότεραν ποιήσασθαι, μὴ
4 A > ΄
παραδόντες τὰς ἀρχὰς ἃς ἀναγκαίας ἡγούμεθα.

. [διάταξις ιδ΄, ᾿Ἔδοξε τῷ συμβουλίῳ σπουδάζειν

χρῆναι σχέσεις φιλικωτέρας μεταξὺ τῶν Σ᾽ κανδι-

ναυικῶν ἐκκλησιῶν καὶ τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς ἐκκλησίας

καταστήσασθαι, τὰς δὲ προκλήσεις τῆς Σ᾽ ονυηδικῆς

ἐκκλησίας, ἐάν τινες γίγνωνται, πρὸς ἀμοιβαῖον

σαφηνισμὸν τῶν διαφορῶν, ἀσμενέστατα δέχεσθαι

ἡμᾶς, βουλομένους εἴ ποτ᾽ ἔσται δυνατόν, προελ-

ὄντος τοῦ χρόνου, τὴν συγκοινωνίαν ἐπ᾽ ἀρχαῖς

βεβαίαις τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας καταστή-
σασθαι.]

Πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχαίους καθολικοὺς καὶ ἄλλους.

" 7 \ \ 4 \ 4 \ > Ἁ

Αδύνατον δὲ μὴ συμπάσχειν τὰ μάλιστα τοὺς εἰς τὴν
“Δ γγλικανὴν κοινωνίαν συντελοῦντας τοῖς ἐν τῇ ἠπείρῳ τῆς
Εὐρώπης εἰς μεταρρύθμισιν τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀγωνιζομένοις,
τοῖς ἐπὶ μεγίσταις δυσκολίαις ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ τὴν αὐτὴν
μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν τάξιν κατασχοῦσιν καὶ τὴν ᾿Επισκοπὴν ὡς
ἀποστολικὴν κτίσιν κρατήσασιν. 'Τουγαροῦν οὔπω
παρεῖναι τὸν καιρὸν ἡγούμενοι ἐν ᾧ συνθήκην πρὸς τού-
των τινὰς ἀμέσως γράφειν δυνάμεθα, καὶ ἐξαιφνίδιον
πρᾶξιν οἱανδήποτε ἀποποιούμενοι, ἀρχαίους καὶ
γνωρίμους κανόνας τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας μέλ-
λουσαν παραβαίνειν, ἡγούμεθα μέντοι δύνασθαι ἡμᾶς τὰ
τῆς φιλίας προτείνειν, μὴ παριδόντες τοὺς κανόνας
ἐκείνους, «αἱ ἐλπίζομεν ἐν καιρῷ καθήκοντι μετὰ τινῶν
γοῦν τῶν κοινωνιῶν τούτων συνθήκην καὶ συμμαχίαν
ποιεῖσθαι.

[Διάταξις ιε΄. (4.) ᾿Ασμένως κατενόησε τὸ Συμβούλιον
τὸ σεμνὸν καὶ αὔταρκες τῆς τάξεως τῆς ὑπὸ τῆς
ἀρχαίας καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ᾿“Ολλανδίας
διατηρουμένης καὶ πρὸς συχνοτέραν καὶ φιλάδελφον
ἐπιμιξίαν ἀποβλέπει ὅπως ἐκποδὼν γίγνηται
πολλὰ τῶν ἡμᾶς καὶ αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ παρὸν διαι-
ρούντων.

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 409

(B)

(I’)

(4.)

Καθήκειν ἡμῖν ἡγούμεθα πρός τε τὴν ἀρχαίαν
καθολικὴν κοινωνίαν ἐν Γερμανίᾳ καὶ πρὸς τὴν
“ς Χριστιανὴν καθολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν" τῆς Ελβετίας
φιλόφρονασυναναστροφὴν προτρέψασθαι, οὐ μόνον
διὰ συμπάθειαν ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ Θεῷ εὐχαριστοῦντας
τῷ ἐν μεγάλαις ἀπορίαις καὶ δυσκολίαις ἅμα δὲ καὶ
πειρασμοῖς πρὸς τὸ πάσχειν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀληθείας
ἐνδυναμώσαντι αὐτούς" καὶ τὰ προνόμια αὐτοῖς
παρέχομεν τὰ ὑπὸ τῆς ᾿Επιτροπῆς ὑποτεθέντα,
ἐπὶ τοῖς ἐν τῇ ἐκθέσει Snrovpévois.*

Συμπαθείας ἀξία ἐστὶν ἡ τῶν ἀρχαίων καθολικῶν
ἐν Αὐστρίᾳ αὐταπαρνητικὴ προθυμία, ἐλπίζομεν
δὲ, τῆς διοργανώσεως αὐτῶν στερεᾶς ἀρκούντως καὶ
τελείας γενομένης, γενικωτέραν κοινωνίαν καθισ-
τάναι δυνήσεσθαι.

Περὶ δὲ τῶν μεταρρυθμιστῶν τῶν ἐν ᾿Ιταλίᾳ καὶ
Γαλλίᾳ καὶ ᾿Ισπανίᾳ καὶ Δουσιτανίᾳ τῶν τοὺς
ἀθέσμους ὅρους τῆς κοινωνίας ἀποσειομένων,
ἐλπίζομεν αὐτοὺς τύπους οὕτως ὑγιαινούσης
διδαχῆς καὶ πολιτείας δέξεσθαι, καὶ διοργάνωσιν
οὕτως καθολικὴν παρασκευάσεσθαι, ὥστε δύνασθαι
ἡμᾶς ἐντελεστέρῳ Twi τρόπῳ ἀποδέχεσθαι
αὐτούς.

(E.) Μὴ βουλόμενοι ἐμποδίζειν τοὺς τῆς καθολικῆς

ἐκκλησίας ἐπισκόπους τοῦ κατὰ τὸ δίκαιον ἔπεμ-
βαίνειν εἰς τὰ πράγματα ἐπειγούσης τῆς ἐσχάτης
ἀνάγκης, παραιτούμεθα μέντοι πρᾶξιν ὁποιανδή-
ποτε ἥτις ἂν δοκῇ τοὺς ἀρχαίους καὶ βεβαίους
ὅρους τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς πολιτείας καὶ τὰ

* Ἔχει δὲ οὕτως ἡ ἔκθεσις"---Οὐδὲν ἡμῖν δοκεῖ κωλύειν μὴ παριέναι
τοὺς κληρικοὺς αὐτῶν καὶ τοὺς πιστοὺς εἰς ἁγίαν κοινωνίαν ἐφ᾽ οἷς
καὶ οἱ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν παραγίγνονται, ἀναγνωρίζομεν δὲ καὶ τὴν προθυμίαν
αὐτῶν τὴν εἰς ἡμᾶς προνόμια πνευματικὰ τοῖς ἡμετέροις παρεχόντων.
Διὰ δὲ τὰς διαφορὰς τὰς λυπηρὰς τῶν γαμικῶν νόμων, ἃς λόγου
πολλοῦ ἀξίας ἡγούμεθα, ἀποφαινόμεθα ὅτι ἀδύνατον ἡμῖν παριέναι εἰς
τὴν ἁγίαν κοινωνίαν τοὺς γεγαμηκότας παρὰ τοὺς νόμους καὶ κανόνας
τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς ἐκκλησίας" τὸ δὲ ἴσον τοῖς ἀρχαίοις καθολικοῖς ἀπο-
νέμοντες οὐκ ἂν δυναίμεθα παριέναι τοὺς τῆς κοινωνίας παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς
ἀπειργομένους.

410 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

συμφέροντα πάσης τῆς ᾿Α γγλικανῆς κοινωνίας μὴ
ἐντρέπεσθαι.

Ἢ πρὸς τὰς ᾿Ανατολικὰς ἐκκλησίας σχέσις.

Πλείστην σπουδὴν ἐδήλωσεν τὸ Συμβούλιον ὅπως
τὴν φιλικὴν σχέσιν τὴν ὑπάρχουσαν τῶν ἀνατολικῶν
ἐκκλησιῶν πρὸς τὴν ᾿Αγγλικανὴν κοινωνίαν βεβαιῶμεν
καὶ συμπληρῶμεν. Αὗται δ᾽ αἱ ἐκκλησίαι διὰ πολλοῦ
χρόνου τῆς συμπαθείας τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ ἀξίας ἑαυτὰς
ἀπέδειξαν, ἀπὸ γενεᾶς γὰρ εἰς γενεὰν ἐν πολλαῖς χώραις
δὴ καὶ ἐν σκοτεινοῖς τόποις τὴν τοῦ φωτὸς τοῦ εὐαγγελικοῦ
φλόγα ζῶσαν διέσωσαν. Εἰ δὲ καὶ τὸ φῶς τοῦτο ἔνθεν
καὶ ἔνθεν ἀσθενὲς εἶναι δοκεῖ καὶ ἀμαυρόν, διὰ τοῦτο
μᾶλλον καθήκει ἡ ἡμᾶς, τῷ καιρῷ ὡς ἐνδέχεται χρωμένους,
ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τούτου καὶ περιθάλπειν' οὐδὲ yap ἐστι
κίνδυνος μὴ οὐ ἡ προσδεκτὰ ἢ ἢ τὰ φιλαδέλφως ὑ ὑπουργούμενα,
an ὀρθῆς γνώμης καὶ ἀγάπης εἰλικρινοῦς παρεχόμενα.
Μετὰ δ᾽ εὐχαριστίας κατανοοῦμεν τοιαῦτα ἐμποδίσματα
κοινωνίας μὴ εἶναι οἷα πρὸς τοὺς Λατεινοὺς δηλαδὴ
ὑπάρχει, διὰ τὸ κυρίως ὁρισθῆναι τὴν ἀπλανησίαν τῆς
ἐκκλησίας ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ ὑψίστῳ Ποντίφικι κατοικεῖν, καὶ ὶ διὰ
τὸ δόγμα τῆς ἁμιάντου συλλήψεως τῆς μακαρίας παρθένου
Μαρίας, καὶ ἄλλα δόγματα τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν παπικῶν
συνόδων κεκανονισμένα. rel μὲν οὖν “ῬΡωμαία ἐκκλησία
τὴν ἀνατολικὴν, ἀδελφὴν οὖσαν, ἀεὶ ἠδίκηκεν. Τοὺς γὰρ
ἐπισκόπους εἰς τὰς ἀρχαίας παροικίας εἰσβιάξεται, καὶ
τὸν προσηλυτισμὸν ἐνεργῶς καὶ συστηματικῶς ἐπιτηδεύει.
Εὐλόγως οὖν ἡ ᾿Ανατολικὴ ἐκκλησία ἀγανακτεῖ ὡς διὰ
τούτων ὑβρισθεῖσα ἐ ἐναντίων ὄντων διόλου ταῖς καθολικαῖς
ἀρχαῖς" ἡ ἡμᾶς δὲ χρὴ τοὺς τῆς ᾿Αγγλικανῆς κοινωνίας
ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς προσέχειν μὴ ὁμοίως πως εἰς αὐτὴν ἁμάρ-
τωμεν.

Εἰ γάρ τις παρὰ τοῖς ἀνατολικοῖς φωτὸς λαμπροτέρου
καὶ πνευματικῆς ζωῆς αὐξήσεως ἐπιθυμεῖ, δύναιτ᾽ ἂν οὗτος
ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐν 9 ἐβαπτίσθη ἐπιμένων φωτισμόν τινα
τοῖς συμπολίταις διαδιδόναι.

᾿Αλλ᾽ ἐν ᾧ τοῦ προσηλυτισμοῦ ὅλως ἀπέχειν δεῖ, εἰκός

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 411

ἐστιν ὅμως καὶ δίκαιον τὸ ἀξίωμα τὸ ἀληθινὸν καὶ τὴν
τάξιν τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἡμῶν ὡς ἱστορικῆς ὑπαρχούσης
ἀποδείκνυσθαι πρὸς τούτους οἵτινες, τοῖς καινοτομου-
μένοις, μάλιστα περὶ τῆς θρησκείας, σφόδρα ἐναντιούμενοι,
τὴν ἱστορίαν μέντοι τῆς καθολικῆς ἀρχαιότητος ἀσμένως
ἀσπάζονται. 4εῖ δὲ ὑπουργεῖν ἡμᾶς πρὸς τὴν ἐκπαίδευσιν
τῶν κληρικῶν, καὶ δὴ καὶ ὁπότ᾽ ἂν ἔνδεια χρημάτων ἢ
ἔτι τοῖς κοινοῖς σχολείοις ὑπηρετεῖν.

[Διάταξις of. Τὸ Συμβούλιον τοῦτο χαῖρον ἐπὶ τῇ
φιλικῇ συναναστροφῇ τῇ γενομένῃ μεταξὺ τῶν
ἀρχιεπισκόπων ἹΚαντουαρίας ἄλλων τε ἐκ τῶν
᾿Αγγλικανῶν ἐπισκόπων καὶ τῶν ἸΠατριαρχῶν
Κωνσταντινουπόλεως ἄλλων τε ἀνατολικῶν
Πατριαρχῶν καὶ ἐπισκόπων, ἀποφαίνεται τὴν
ἐλπίδα τοῦ τὰ τῆς ἐντελεστέρας κοινωνίας νῦν
ἐμποδίσματα, προελθόντος τοῦ χρόνου, ἐκποδὼν
γενήσεσθαι, προκοπτούσης τῆς ἐπιμιξίας καὶ
αὐξανομένου τοῦ φωτισμοῦ. ἸΠαρακαλεῖ δὲ τὸ
Συμβούλιον τοὺς πιστοὺς ἐπὶ προσευχὴν ἐκτενῆ
περὶ τούτου, καὶ ὑποτίθεται τοῖς συγχριστιανοῖς
ὅτι δεῖ τὰς ἐπινοίας καὶ τὰς ἐνεργείας ἐπὶ τὴν
ἐσωτερικὴν μεταρρύθμισιν μᾶλλον τῶν ἀνατολι-
κῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἀπευθύνειν, ἢ ἐπὶ τὸ ἀφέλκειν ἄλλον
καὶ ἄλλον εἰς τὴν ἑαυτῶν κοινωνίαν.

Περὶ τῶν κανονικῶν σταθμῶν διδαχῆς καὶ
θρησκείας.

Τούτων δὲ μνησθέντας δεῖ ὑμᾶς τὰς κανονικὰς στάθμας
διδαχῆς καὶ θρησκείας μετὰ πολλῆς φροντίδος σκοπεῖν.
Δεῖ γὰρ τὰ μάλιστα καὶ τὴν πίστιν ἡμῶν καὶ τὴν πρᾶξιν
τοιαύτας οὔσας δείκνυσθαι καὶ ταῖς ἀρχαίαις ἐκκλησίαις
καὶ ταῖς νῦν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἱεραποστόλων ἀνα-
τρεφομέναις ἐκκλησίαις, οἷαι μήτε ἂν ἀγανακτήσεως
αἰτίαν διδῶσιν, μήτε ἀληθινὴν αὐτονομίαν ἐμποδίζωσιν,
μήτε σκάνδαλα παρέχωσιν τοῖς ἐπὶ τὴν ἐντελῆ κοινωνίαν
προιέναι βουλομένοις.

412 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

Τοῖς δὲ προτέροις Σ υμβουλίοις ἑ ἑπόμενοι ἀποφαινόμεθα
ἑνοῦσθαι ἡμᾶς μιᾷ Κεφαλῇ καὶ Θεῷ καὶ Σωτῆρι ἡ ἡμῶν
ὑποτεταγμένους, ἐν τῇ κοινωνίᾳ τῆς μιᾶς καθολικῆς καὶ
ἀποστολικῆς ᾿Εκκλησΐἴίας, κατέχειν τε τὴν μίαν πίστιν τὴν
ἐν ταῖς «ἁγίαις γραφαῖς ἀποκεκαλυμμένην, ἐν τοῖς Συμ-
βόλοις « ὡρισμένην, ὑπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆθεν ᾿Εκκλησίας κεκρατη-
μένην, καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀναμφισβητήτων οἰκουμενικῶν
Σ᾽ υνόδων κεκανονισμένην" δεχόμεθα δὲ ὥσπερ στάθμας
διδαχῆς ὁμοῦ καὶ θρησκείας τὴν βίβλον τῆς δημοσίας
εὐχῆς μετὰ τοῦ ἐμπεριεχομένου κατηχισμοῦ, τὸν δὲ τύπον
τῆς χειροτονίας, καὶ τὰ τριάκοντα ἐννέα ἄρθρα---κληρο-
νομίαν ἐξαίρετον τῆς ἐν ᾿Αγγλίᾳ ἐκκλησίας, ἃ καὶ πάντα
πᾶσαι αἱ τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας ἐκκλησίαι ἢ παντελῶς
ἢ ὡς ἐπὶ τὰ πλεῖστα ὁμολογοῦσιν.

Βουλόμεθα δὲ τὰς στάθμας ταύτας τοῖς ἐξωτερικοῖς
ἐκκλησίαις ἀφελῶς καὶ ἁπλῶς ἐνδείκνυσθαι. ᾿᾿Ελευ-
θερίαν δὲ μέχρι τινὸς ταῖς ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν βλαστανούσαις
ἐκκλησίαις συγχωρητέον" οὐ “γὰρ εὔλογον ταῖς τοιαύταις τὰ
τριάκοντα καὶ ἐννέα ἄρθρα ὅλως ἐπιτάττειν ὡς “ὅρους τῆς
κοινωνίας, ἐπικεχρωσμένα δὴ καὶ κατὰ τὰ ῥήματα καὶ
κατὰ τὴν μόρφωσιν διὰ τῶν περιστάσεων τῶν κατὰ τὸν
καιρὸν τῆς συνθέσεως αὐτῶν ἐπιπολαζουσῶν. ᾿Αδύνατον
δ᾽ ἂν εἴη τοὐναντίον ἡμᾶς μετέχειν. αὐταῖς τῆς τῶν λει-
τουργῶν χειροτονίας, ὡς πληρῶς ἡμῖν συγκοινωνούσαις,
μήπω ἀποδεδευγμένου τοῦ τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατά γε τὴν
οὐσίαν τύπον διδαχῆς κρατεῖν. Οὐ μὴν χαλεπὸν ἃ ἂν εἴη,
ἵνα μὴ ἀδύνατον λέγωμεν, τὸ ἄρθρα συντάττειν, κατὰ
τὰς στάθμας τὰς ἡμετέρας τῆς διδαχῆς καὶ τῆς θρησκείας,
ἐπιτακτέα ἅπασιν τοῖς ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τοιαύταις
χειροτονουμένριᾳ.

[Διάταξις νη: Aire? τὸ Σ υμβούλιον παρὰ τοῦ ἀρχι-
ἐπισκόπου τῆς Καντουαρίας, ὅπως μετὰ τοιούτων
ods ἀξίους ἕξει συμβουλεύσηται εἰ σύμφορον
ἔσται τὴν ᾿Αγγλικὴν ἑρμήνειαν τοῦ Νικαίου
συμβόλου καὶ τοῦ “ὅστις βούλεται" (quicunque
vult) ἐπανορθοῦν.

Διάταξις ιθ΄. Περὶ τῶν νεοκτίστων ἐκκλησιῶν, μάλιστα
ἐν ταῖς μὴ χριστιαναῖς χώραις, δεῖ ὅρον εἶναι τῆς

Greek Version of Encyclical Letter of 1888. 413

ἀναγνωρίσεως αὐτῶν, ὡς πληρῶς ἡμῖν συγκοινω-
νουσῶν, καὶ μάλιστα τῆς δωρεᾶς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν τῆς
ἐπισκοπικῆς διαδοχῆς, τὸ δεξασθαι ἡμᾶς παρ᾽
αὐτῶν τεκμήρια ἱκανὰ τοῦ αὐτὰς τὴν αὐτὴν κατά
γε τὴν οὐσίαν διδαχὴν ἡμῖν κρατεῖν, καὶ τοὺς
κληρικοὺς αὐτῶν ἄρθρα ὑποσημαίνεσθαι κατὰ τὰ
διαρρήδην ἐν ταῖς στάθμαις ἡμῶν ταῖς περὶ διδαχῆς
καὶ θρησκείας ἀποπεφασμένα, ἀνάγκην δὲ εἶναι
μηδεμίαν δέχεσθαι αὐτὰς ὁλοκλήρως τὰ τριάκοντα
καὶ ἐννέα ἄρθρα τῆς θρησκείας.

Ταύτην, ἀδελφοὶ, τὴν ἐπιστολὴν εἰς τέλος ἄγομεν
εὐχαριστίαν ταπεινὴν καὶ ἐγκάρδιον Θεῷ παντοκράτορι
ἀπονέμοντες ὑπὲρ τῆς μεγάλης πρὸς ἡμᾶς χρηστότητος
καὶ φιλανθρωπίας. Σ᾿υνεχώρησεν γὰρ ἡμῖν ὧδε συναθροί-
ζεσθαι πλείοσιν οὖσιν τὸν ἀριθμὸν ἢ τὸ πρίν. Παντα-
χόθεν δὲ τῆς γῆς γνώσεως ἅμα καὶ ἐμπειρίας θησαυροὶ εἰς
τὸ κοινὸν συνηνέχθησαν. ᾿Εγένετο δὲ ἡμῖν καταλαμ-
βάνειν μᾶλλον ἢ τὸ πρὶν ἐδυνάμεθα τό τε μέγεθος καὶ
τὴν δύναμιν καὶ τὴν ἰσχὺν τῆς μεγάλης ᾿Αγγλικανῆς
κοινωνίας.

Εἰς ὅσα ἐπιτηδεία ἐστὶν αὕτη, οἵαις δὲ εὐκαιρίαις καὶ οἵοις

i) 1s aipntsie
προνομίοις χρῆται---ταῦτα ἡσθόμεθα. °Ev ταῖς ζητήσεσιν
δὴ ταῖς ἐν κοινῇ συνόδῳ γενομέναις τὴν κατ᾽ οὐσίαν ἑνότητα
ἐδοκιμάσαμεν τὴν πάσας τὰς διαφορὰς καὶ καταστάσεως
καὶ προκοπῆς συνάπτουσαν. “Οπου γὰρ γνώμης διαφωνία
ἐν ἡμῖν ἐγένετο ἐκεῖ καὶ πνεύματος συμφωνία καὶ ἑνότης
σκοποῦ" καὶ πρὸς τὰς παροικίας ἄλλος ἄλλοσε ἐπανερχ-
όμεθα ἀναψυχόμενοι ἅμα καὶ ἐνδυναμούμενοι καὶ ἐνθου-
σιάζοντες ταῖς ἀναμνήσεσιν ἃς μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν κομίζομεν.

Ἢ δὲ τῆς εὐχαριστίας αἴσθησις ἀμέσως τῇ τοῦ καθή-
κοντος χρείᾳ συνδέδεται. Ἢ γὰρ ἀληθινὴ κατάληψις τῶν
προνομίων τῶν ἐν τῇ ᾿Αγγλικανῇ κοινωνίᾳ ἡμῖν ὑπαρ-
χόντων μείζονα ἡμῖν αἴσθησιν παρέχει τῆς ὀφειλῆς, οὐ
τῷ ἡμετέρῳ λαῷ μόνον οὐδὲ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν τοῖς ὑπὸ τῶν
ἱεραποστόλων εὐαγγελιζομένοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ πάσαις ταῖς
ἐκκλησίαις τοῦ Θεοῦ. ᾿Εξαίρετος γὰρ ἡμῶν ἡ τάξις καὶ
πρὸς ἐξαίρετον ἔργον εὐκαίρως ἡμᾶς ἀνακαλεῖ. Εὐχ-
όμεθα δὲ ἐκτενῶς παντας---κληρικοὺς ἅμα καὶ λαικοὺς ----

414 Lambeth Conference of 1888.

τὴν. τοῦ Θεοῦ προαίρεσιν τὴν πρόδηλον ἐνθυμεῖσθαι καὶ
ἐν οἵᾳ δή ποτε κλήσει γενομένους ἀγωνίζεσθαι ὅπως ἂν
τὴν βουλὴν Αὐτοῦ εἰς τέλος κατεργάζωνται.

Τούτοις τοῖς ῥήμασιν ὑμῖν ἀποταξάμενοι τὰ ἐν τῷ
Σ υμβουλίῳ συμπεπερασμένα τῇ μελέτῃ ὑμῶν παρα-
δίδομεν, ἱκετεύοντες ὅπως τὸ ἅγιον Π [νεῦμα πάντα τὰ
ἐνθυμήματα ὑ ὑμῶν. κατευθύνῃ καὶ εἰς πᾶσαν “τὴν ἀλήθειαν
κατάγῃ ὑμᾶς, καὶ ὅπως τὰ βουλεύματα ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς
ὑμῶν ἐνεργείας εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ καὶ προκοπὴν τῆς τοῦ
Χριστοῦ βασιλείας συντείνῃ. ᾿

“Ὑπέγραψα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Συμβουλίου,

EAOTAPAO® O ΤῊΣ ΚΑΝΤΟΥΑΡΙΑΣ.

PUBLICATIONS OF THE
Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.

VI ABABA AEB ABA @ @ 2 fm .

BEING OF GOD, Six Addresses on the. By

C. J. Etticott, D.D., Bishop of Gloucéster and Bristol.
PENNE WEN ee IU ins cn epcccncncece δεν νοῦς Cloth boards 1 6

BIBLE PLACES; or, THE TOPOGRAPHY OF
THE HOLY LAND, By the Rev. Canon

TRISTRAM. With Mapand numerous Woodcuts. Crown
νον eee RPEE TRL Cc apxnevecsvescocsocecs ροῦν Cloth boards 4 0

CALLED TO BE SAINTS: The Minor Festivais
Devotionally Studied. By Curistina G.

ROSSETTI, author of ‘‘Seek and Find.” Post 8vo.
Cloth boards § oO

CHRISTIANS UNDER THE CRESCENT IN
ASIA, By the Rev. E. L. Currs, B.A. With

numerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo............. Cloth boards κα O

CHURCH HISTORY, SKETCHES OF, From the

First Century to the Reformation. By the Rev. J. C.
ROBERTSON. With Map. I2mo. ......... Cloth boards 2 Ὁ

GOSPELS, THE FOUR. Arranged in the Form
of an English Harmony, from the Text of the Authorised
Version. By the Rev. J. M. FULLER, M.A. With

Analytical Table of Contents and Four Maps. Post 8vo.
Cloth boards 1 Oo

HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH, In

Short Biographical Sketches. By the Rev. JULIUS
LLOYD Mi EME ΒΟΟΣ κὸν τις οἰ ννορξο νος Cloth boards 1 6

JEWISH NATION, A® HISTORY OF THE,
From the Earliest Times to the Present Day. By the
late E. H. PALMER, M.A. With Map of Palestine and
Numerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo. ......... Cloth boards 4 0

LAND OF ISRAEL, THE, A Journal of Travel in

Palestine, undertaken with special reference to its
Physical Character. By the Rev. CANON TRISTRAM.
With Two Maps and Numerous Illustrations. Large
POU δου Liss Seas covey Meebo se κού γον cre Cloth boards 10 6

PUBLICATIONS OF THE SOCIETY.

LECTURES ON THE HISTORICAL AND DOG-
MATICAL POSITION OF THE CHURCH OF
ENGLAND. By the Rev. W. Baker, D.D.
ΤΌΣ Oy iaaiceceek idee kata eee ἠδ ον κόνις ἐο δον Cloth boards I

NARRATIVE OF A MODERN PILGRIMAGE
THROUGH PALESTINE ON HORSEBACK,
AND WITH TENTS.’ By the Rev. A. C.

SMITH, M.A. Numerous Illustrations, and Four
Coloured Plates. Crown 8vo. ...........c00000 Cloth boards §

PALEY’S EVIDENCES. A New Edition, with
Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By the Rev. E. A.
LITTON: RUE δι A i A eee ce Cloth boards 4

PALEY’S HOR PAULINE. A New Edition,
with Notes, Appendix, and Preface. By the Rev. J. S.
TOWSON, DD. > Post δύδι ᾿νε αν Cloth boards 2

PLAIN REASONS AGAINST JOINING THE

CHURCH OF ROME. By the Rev. R. F.

LITTLEDALE, LL.D., ἄς. Revised and Enlarged
Edition: : Post Owe... ρα τοι Cloth boards 1

SOME CHIEF TRUTHS OF RELIGION. By the
Rev. E. L. Cutts, B.A., Author of ““ Pastoral Counsels,”

HISTORY. By the Rev. E. L. Currts, B.A.,
Vicar of Holy Trinity, Haverstock Hill. Crown 8vo.
Cloth boards 3 |

TURNING-POINTS OF GENERAL CHURCH

HISTORY. By the Rev. E. L. Curts, BA, _
Author of ‘‘ Pastoral Counsels.” Crown 8vo. Cloth boards καὶ

Sondor:

NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, CHARING CROSS, W.C. ;
43, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET, E.C.;
BRIGHTON: 135, NORTH STREET.

φρο» ἂν ατ'

a 3 4 4 - Ἀ ‘ ‘ ᾿
oo be ‘ x ; ᾿
᾿ 2 τ Π “ ᾽ 5
4
. \ ᾿
ὁ ᾿ ν ᾿ 5
ΓῚ τ ᾿ ᾿ “i ve
᾿ ᾿ ᾿ i
. ‘ > ᾿ wo ᾿ υ 5
’ 5 "3
« sy 3 > r
4 > ᾿ Η

Koes I
ere

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The Lambeth conferences of 1867, 1878, and 1888 : with the official reports and resolutions, together with the sermons preached at the conferences"

See other formats